Table of Contents

Executive Summary

New Graph Environment and Nupqu Limited Partnership were retained by the Canadian Wildlife Federation in the fall of 2020 to plan and conduct fish passage and habitat confirmation assessments at road-stream crossings within the Elk River watershed group. Although some planning for future assessments was conducted for both the Elk River watershed upstream of the Elko Dam near Elko, BC and the Flathead River, on the ground surveys focused on the Elk River and tributaries located upstream of the Elko Dam.


A total of 72 phase 1 assessments were conducted with 17 crossings considered “passable”, 8 crossings considered ‘potential’ barriers and 43 crossings considered barriers.


Habitat confirmation assessments were conducted at 15 sites with a total of approximately 15 km of stream assessed. Five crossings were rated as high priorities for proceeding to design for replacement, Nine crossings were rated as moderate priorities for proceeding to design for replacement, 0 crossings were rated as a low priority and 1 rated as “no fix”.

1 Introduction

New Graph Environment and Nupqu Limited Partnership were retained by the Canadian Wildlife Federation in the fall of 2020 to plan and conduct fish passage and habitat confirmation assessments at road-stream crossings within the Elk River watershed group. Although some planning for future assessments was conducted for both the Elk River watershed upstream of the Elko Dam near Elko, BC and the Flathead River, on the ground surveys focused on the Elk River and tributaries located upstream of the Elko Dam.


The health and viability of freshwater fish populations can depend on access to tributary and off channel areas which provide refuge during high flows, opportunities for foraging, overwintering habitat, spawning habitat and summer rearing habitat (Bramblett et al. 2002; Swales and Levings 1989; Diebel et al. 2015). Culverts can present barriers to fish migration due to low water depth, increased water velocity, turbulence, a vertical drop at the culvert outlet and/or maintenance issues (Slaney, Zaldokas, and Watershed Restoration Program (B.C.) 1997; Cote et al. 2005). Reconnection of fragmented habitats by culvert removal or replacement is a management action that can generate high ecological returns relative to other habitat restoration techniques (Saldi-Caromile et al. 2004; Roni, Hanson, and Beechie 2008). As road crossing structures are commonly upgraded as part of road maintenance there are numerous opportunities to restore connectivity by ensuring that fish passage considerations are incorporated into repair and replacement designs.

2 Background

As a result of high-level direction from the provincial government, a Fish Passage Strategic Approach protocol has been developed for British Columbia to ensure that the greatest opportunities for restoration of fish passage are pursued. A Fish Passage Technical Working Group has been formed to coordinate the protocol and data is continuously amalgamated within the Provincial Steam Crossing Inventory System (PSCIS). The strategic approach protocol involves a four-phase process as described in Fish Passage Technical Working Group (2014) :


The scope of 2020/2021 project activities reported on in this document includes planning for and implementation of the first two phases of fish passage assessment in the Elk River watershed upstream of the Elko Dam.


2.1 Project Location

To focus the project area on habitat with high value for conservation of westslope cutthrout trout, the project was focused within the upper Elk River watershed upstream of the Elko Dam located at Elko, BC with planning also conducted for the Flathead River watershed.


2.1.1 Ktunaxa Nation

The project location is within the traditional territory of the Ktunaxa Nation (“Ktunaxa Nation” 2020) with Elk River components within an area known as Qukin ʔamakʔis, or Raven’s Land (Ministry of Forests 2020). When Europeans settled in the Kootenay Region around 200 hundred years ago, the Indian Reserves were created which lead to the seven Indian Bands:

  • ʔakisq̓nuk- Columbia Lake Band (Windermere, BC);
  • ʔaq̓am- St. Mary’s Band (Cranbrook, BC);
  • ʔakink̓umǂasnuqǂiʔit- Tobacco Plains Band (Grasmere, BC);
  • yaqan nuʔkiy- Lower Kootenay Band (Creston, BC);
  • kyaknuqǂiʔit- Shuswap Band (Invermere, BC);
  • ʔaq̓anqmi- Kootenai Tribe of Idaho (Bonners Ferry, Idaho);
  • k̓upawi¢q̓nuk- Ksanka Band (Elmo, Montana)


(“Ktunaxa Nation” 2020) report the vision statement of the Ktunaxa is:


“Kȼmak̓qa ksukⱡuⱡa·k kuk̓qani ȼ k̓itqakiⱡ haqa ksiʔⱡ ȼxa ʔa·kⱡukqaʔis ksukiⱡq̓ukaʔmi·k kiʔin Ktunaxa naʔs ʔamak̓ʔis. Qus pik̓aksȼ naʔs ȼxaⱡ yaqanakiⱡ haqaʔki. K̓itqawiȼmu kakiⱡwiȼkiⱡ ʔamakʔis k̓isnikȼik kȼxaⱡ qa kiⱡkk̓axuxami·k k̓itqakiⱡ haqa ȼ k̓isʔin ʔaknumuȼtiⱡʔis.”


The vision statement has been translated to english as:


“Strong, healthy citizens and communities, speaking our languages and celebrating who we are and our history in our ancestral homelands, working together, managing our lands and resources, within a self-sufficient, self-governing Nation.”


2.1.2 Elk Valley Cumulative Effects Management Framework

Coal deposits are located in the Elk River and Flathead coalfields which extend fromthe Canada-USA border to the northwest for 175km along the Rocky Mountains with cumulative coal thickness ranging up to 70m. Subsurface resource exploration and develpment is prohibited in the Flathead River watershed due to legislation enacted in 2011. At the time of reporting there were four active coal mines in the Elk River watershed (Fording River, Greenhills, Line Creek and Elkview) on closed mine (Coal Mountain) and multiple exploration projects as well as proposed new mines (Mines and Ministry of Energy 2020).


First Nations, stakeholders, proponents and provincial and municipal governments recognize that the region has been impacted by historic and current coal operations as well as other stresses such as forestry operations, wildfire, residential development, recreational activities and transportation. To assess the historic, current and potential future conditions of valued component and to support resource management decisions within the region the Provincial Cumulative Effects Framework, the Elk Valley Cumulative Effects Management Framework (EV-CEMF) has been formed with joint management between the Ktunaxa Nation Council and the B.C. Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development (FLNRORD). A working group consisting of the Ktunaxa Nation Council, industry, community, organizations, and provincial government ministries has been put in place to provide guidance and oversight for EV-CEMF activities. Valued component technical reports for Grizzly Bear, Riparian and westslope cutthroat trout (Davidson et al. 2018), bighorn sheep, and old and mature forest have been drafted, integrated into an overarching Cumulative Effects Assessment and Management Report (Elk Valley Cumulative Effects Management Framework Working Group 2018), endorsed by the Working Group, and will be submitted to FLNRORD Regional Executive Director and KNC for final approval. These reports describe the historical, current, and future assessment of cumulative effects in the Elk Valley and provide management and mitigation recommendations. Next step include the development of an Implementation Plan to identify priority actions and spatial locations for to focus management and mitigation of cumulative effect in the valley (Ministry of Forests 2020).


2.1.3 Elk River Alliance

The Elk River Alliance is a community-based water group that aims to improve and preserve watershed health through projects that raise watershed literacy, inform sustainable water decision-making, collect scientific data to prioritize restoration opportunities and promote safe and sustainable river recreation (“Elk River Alliance” 2020a). Following a large flood event in 2013 that caused significant property and infrastructure damage throughout the valley, the Elk River Alliance developed a comprehensive Flood Strategy report to provide a review of watershed functioning, forecast streamflow/flooding in the Elk Valley, describe the effects of flooding on the community and provide strategies to mitigate against future flood risk (Walker et al. 2016). Building on the 2016 Flood Strategy, the Elk River Cutthroat Trout Research Initiative is a Elk River Alliance project which focuses on habitat evaluation, identification of restoration opportunities and the communication of westslope cutthrout trout information to the community by conducting redd surveys, habitat assessments and the drafting of restoration plans for future habitat improvements (Elk River Alliance 2020b).


Overview map of Study Areas

Figure 2.1: Overview map of Study Areas


Hydrograph for Elk River at Fernie (Station #08NK002 - Lat 49.503471 Lon -115.070129). Available daily discharge data from 1970 to 2018.

Figure 2.2: Hydrograph for Elk River at Fernie (Station #08NK002 - Lat 49.503471 Lon -115.070129). Available daily discharge data from 1970 to 2018.


Summary of hydrology statistics in Elk River at Fernie (Station #08NK002)

Figure 2.3: Summary of hydrology statistics in Elk River at Fernie (Station #08NK002)


2.2 Fisheries

Fish species recorded in the Elk River watershed group are detailed in Table 2.1 (MoE 2020b).


Table 2.1: Fish species recorded in the Elk River watershed group.
Scientific Name Species Name Species Code
Catostomus catostomus Longnose Sucker LSU
Catostomus commersoni White Sucker WSU
Catostomus macrocheilus Largescale Sucker CSU
Family: Salmonidae Cutthroat Trout CT
Oncorhynchus clarki clarki x Oncorhynchus mykiss Cutthroat/Rainbow cross CRS
Oncorhynchus clarki lewisi Westslope (Yellowstone) Cutthroat Trout WCT
Oncorhynchus mykiss Rainbow Trout RB
Oncorhynchus nerka Kokanee KO
Oncorhynchus sp Fish are either RB or CT, but suspect they are CT CT/RB
Prosopium williamsoni Mountain Whitefish MW
Ptychocheilus oregonensis Northern Pikeminnow NSC
Rhynichthys cataractae Longnose Dace LNC
Richardsonius balteatus Redside Shiner RSC
Salvelinus confluentus Bull Trout BT
Salvelinus fontinalis Brook Trout EB

2.2.1 Westslope Cutthrout Trout

In a swimming performance study conducted in an open-channel flume Blank et al. (2020) estimated the overall average swim speeds of westlope cutthrout trout at 0.84m/s with a maximum observed swim speed of 3.55m/s. Nine of 11 westslope cutthrout trout radio-tagged in the Blackfoot River drainage, Montana by Schmetterling (2001) made movements to tributaries presumable for spawning. While in tributaries, fish movements averaged 12.5km and stayed within a 100m reach during the spawning period for between 15 and 63 days.


Spawning habitat for resident and fluvial subpopulations is documented in Schmetterling (2001) as in the tailouts of deep pools at moderate to high-flow events within small, low-gradient streams with cold well-oxygenated water and clean unsilted gravels. Proximity to large woody debris, boulder or bedrock cover is important for spawning fish while residing in spawning tributaries as high mortality may result when suitable cover is lacking. The dominant substrate used for spawning ws gravel (1.8 - 3.3cm diameter) with spawning occurring in late May and June towards the end of the spring freshet with rising water temperatures between 7-11\(^\circ\)C


3 Methods

Workflows for the project can be classified into four categories: planning, fish passage assessments, habitat confirmation assessments and reporting.

3.1 Planning

To identify priorities for crossing structure rehabilitation, background literature, fisheries information, PSCIS, Fish Habitat Model outputs modified from Norris and Mount (2016) and bcfishpass (Norris 2020) outputs were reviewed. The Fish Habitat Model was developed by the BC Ministry of Environment to provide estimates of the amount of fish habitat potentially accessible to fish upstream of crossing locations. The model calculates the average gradient of BC Freshwater Atlas stream network lines at minimum 100m long intervals starting from the downstream end of the streamline segment and working upstream. The network lines are broken into max gradient categories with new segments created when the average gradient of the stream lines exceeds user provided gradient thresholds.


bcfishpass is comprised of sql and python based shell script libraries that “generate a simple model of aquatic habitat connectivity by identifying natural barriers to fish passage (plus hydro dams that are not feasible to remediate) and classifying all streams not upstream of these barriers as ‘potentially accessible’ (Norris 2020). On potentially accessible streams,”bcfishpass scripts “identify known barriers and additional anthropogenic features (primarily road/railway stream crossings, i.e. culverts) that are potentially barriers. To prioritize these features for assessment or remediation,” the scripts “report on how much modelled potentially accessible aquatic habitat the barriers may obstruct. The model can be refined with known fish observations. Depending on the modelling scenario, all aquatic habitat downstream of a given fish observation can be classified as ‘observed accessible’, overriding any downstream barriers.”


Following delineation of “non-fish habitat” with the Fish Habitat Model, the average gradient of each stream segment within habitat classified as below the 22% threshold was calculated and summed using bcfishpass to quantify upstream habitat potentially available for westslope cutthrout trout and facilitate stream line symbology based on stream morphology. bcfishpass summed average gradients within seven categories (0 - 3%, 3 - 5%, 5 - 8%, 8 - 15%, 15 - 22%, 22 - 30% and >30%) with these outputs further amalgamated to summarize and symbolize potential upstream habitat in four categories: riffle/cascade (0 - 5%), step-pool (5 - 15%), step-pool very steep (15-22%) and extremely steep (22 - 30%) (Table 3.1). For each crossing location, the linear length of stream habitat upstream of crossings and <20% was summarized by average gradient and the area of lake and wetland habitat upstream was collated and reviewed to give an indication of the potential quantity and quality of habitat potentially gained should fish passage be restored.


Table 3.1: Stream gradient categories (threshold and average) and associated channel type.
Gradient Channel Type
0 - 5% Riffle and cascade pool
5 - 15% Step pool
15 - 22% Step pool - very steep
22 - 30% Step pool - extremely steep (bull trout only)
>30% Non fish habitat


To prepare for Phase 1 and 2 assessments in the study area, past fish passage assessment reports for the Elk River watershed group were first reviewed to identify crossing structures not yet assessed or previously ranked as priorities for rehabilitation in VAST Resource Solutions Inc. (2013) and Grainger (2011). To determine which of those crossings had not yet been assessed with Phase 2 assessments we cross-referenced these reports with the Phase 2 report previously completed in the study area by Masse Environmental Consultants Ltd. (2015) and reviewed outputs from the Fish Habitat Model and bcfishpass. Outputs for PSCIS crossings that met the following criteria underwent a detailed review to facilitate prioritization for Phase 2 - Habitat Confirmations.

  • Stream crossing barriers and potential barriers on streams with confirmed fish presence upstream of the structure.
  • Stream crossing barriers and potential barriers on streams documented as > 2.0m wide with linear lengths of modelled upstream habitat <20% gradient for ≥1km.
  • Stream crossing barriers and potential barriers located on streams classified as 3rd order or higher.
  • Stream crossing barriers and potential barriers located on streams with >5 ha of modeled wetland and/or lake habitat upstream of the structure.
  • Stream crossing barriers and potential barriers on streams with habitat value rated as “medium” or “high” in past fish passage assessment data.


3.2 Fish Passage Assessments

In the field, crossings prioritized for follow-up were first assessed for fish passage following the procedures outlined in “Field Assessment for Determining Fish Passage Status of Closed Bottomed Structures” (MoE 2011). Crossings surveyed included closed bottom structures (CBS), open bottom structures (OBS) and crossings considered “other” (i.e. fords). Six digit numerical crossing identifiers were generated by bcfishpass for each of the crossings modelled. Crossings identified in the field that had no corresponding GIS generated ID were given unique identifiers beginning with the date in YYYYMMDD format appended with an identifier between 1 and 10 (ex. 2020091601). Photos were taken at surveyed crossings and when possible included images of the road, crossing inlet, crossing outlet, crossing barrel, channel downstream and channel upstream of the crossing and any other relevant features. Additionally, the following information was recorded for all surveyed crossings: date of inspection, crossing reference, crew member initials, Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinates, stream name, road name and kilometer, road tenure information, crossing type, crossing subtype, culvert diameter or span for OBS, culvert length or width for OBS. A more detailed “full assessment” was completed for all closed bottom structures and included the following parameters: presence/absence of continuous culvert embedment (yes/no), average depth of embedment, whether or not the culvert bed resembled the native stream bed, presence of and percentage backwatering, fill depth, outlet drop, outlet pool depth, inlet drop, culvert slope, average downstream channel width, stream slope, presence/absence of beaver activity, presence/absence of fish at time of survey, type of valley fill, and a habitat value rating. Habitat value ratings were based on channel morphology, flow characteristics (perennial, intermittent, ephemeral), fish migration patterns, the presence/absence of deep pools, un-embedded boulders, substrate, woody debris, undercut banks, aquatic vegetation and overhanging riparian vegetation (Table 3.2). For crossings determined to be potential barriers or barriers based on the data (see Barrier Scoring), a culvert fix and recommended diameter/span was proposed.


All field data collected including photos were uploaded to the Provincial Stream Crossing Inventory System (PSCIS).

Table 3.2: Habitat value criteria (Fish Passage Technical Working Group, 2011).
Habitat Value Fish Habitat Criteria
High The presence of high value spawning or rearing habitat (e.g., locations with abundance of suitably sized gravels, deep pools, undercut banks, or stable debris) which are critical to the fish population.
Medium Important migration corridor. Presence of suitable spawning habitat. Habitat with moderate rearing potential for the fish species present.
Low No suitable spawning habitat, and habitat with low rearing potential (e.g., locations without deep pools, undercut banks, or stable debris, and with little or no suitably sized spawning gravels for the fish species present).


3.3 Barrier Scoring

Fish passage potential was determined for each stream crossing identified as a closed bottom structure as per MoE (2011). The combined scores from five criteria: depth and degree to which the structure is embedded, outlet drop, stream width ratio, culvert slope, and culvert length were used to screen whether each culvert was a likely barrier to some fish species and life stages (Table 3.3, Table 3.4. These criteria were developed based on data obtained from various studies and reflect an estimation for the passage of a juvenile salmon or small resident rainbow trout (Clarkin et al. 2005 ; Bell 1991; Thompson 2013).


Table 3.3: Fish Barrier Risk Assessment (MoE 2011).
Risk LOW MOD HIGH
Embedded >30cm or >20% of diameter and continuous <30cm or 20% of diameter but continuous No embedment or discontinuous
Value 0 5 10
Outlet Drop (cm) <15 15-30 >30
Value 0 5 10
SWR <1.0 1.0-1.3 >1.3
Value 0 3 6
Slope (%) <1 1-3 >3
Value 0 5 10
Length (m) <15 15-30 >30
Value 0 3 6


Table 3.4: Fish Barrier Scoring Results (MoE 2011).
Cumlative Score Result
0-14 passable
15-19 potential barrier
>20 barrier


3.4 Habitat Confirmation Assessments

Following fish passage assessments, habitat confirmations were completed in accordance with procedures outlined in the document “A Checklist for Fish Habitat Confirmation Prior to the Rehabilitation of a Stream Crossing” (Fish Passage Technical Working Group 2011). The main objective of the field surveys was to document upstream habitat quantity and quality and to determine if any other obstructions exist above or below the crossing. Habitat value was assessed based on channel morphology, flow characteristics (perennial, intermittent, ephemeral), the presence/absence of deep pools, un-embedded boulders, substrate, woody debris, undercut banks, aquatic vegetation and overhanging riparian vegetation. Criteria used to rank habitat value was based on guidelines in Fish Passage Technical Working Group (2011) (Table 3.2).


During habitat confirmations, to standardize data collected and facilitate submission of the data to provincial databases, information was collated on “Site Cards”. Habitat characteristics recorded included channel widths, wetted widths, residual pool depths, gradients, bankfull depths, stage, temperature, conductivity, pH, cover by type, substrate and channel morphology (among others). When possible, the crew surveyed downstream of the crossing to the point where fish presence had been previously confirmed and upstream to a minimum distance of 600m. Any potential obstacles to fish passage were inventoried with photos, physical descriptions and locations recorded on site cards. Surveyed routes were recorded with time-signatures on handheld GPS units.


Fish sampling was conducted a subset of sites when biological data was considered to add significant value to the physical habitat assessment information. When possible, electrofishing was utilized within discrete site units both upstream and downstream of the subject crossing with electrofisher settings, water quality parameters (i.e. conductivity, temperature and ph), start location, length of site and wetted widths (average of a minimum of three) recorded. For each fish captured, fork length and species was recorded, with results included within the fish data submission spreadsheet. Fish information and habitat data will be submitted to the province under scientific fish collection permit CB20-611971.


3.5 Reporting

This pdf report and an online interactive report were generated with bookdown (Xie 2016) from Rmarkdown (Allaire et al. 2020) documents processing raw data available at the New Graph Environment Github Site. In addition to numerous spatial layers sourced through the BC Data Catalogue, data inputs for this project can be sourced here and include:


3.5.1 Cost Benefit Analysis

A cost benefit analysis was conducted for each crossing determined to be a barrier based on an estimate of cost associated with remediation or replacement of the crossing with a structure that facilitates fish passage and the amount of potential habitat that would be made available by remediating fish passage at the site (habitat gain index).


3.5.2 Habitat Gain Index

The habitat gain index is the quantity of modelled habitat upstream of the subject crossing and represents an estimate of habitat gained with remediation of fish passage at the crossing. For this project, a gradient threshold between accessible and non-accessible habitat was set at 20% (for a minimimum length of 100m) intended to represent the maximum gradient of which westslope cutthrout trout are likely to be able to migrate upstream. For Phase 1 assessments a “net” value of habitat quantity output from bcfishpass was used to estimate the amount of habitat upstream of each crossing less than 20% gradient before either a falls of height >5m - as recorded in MoE (2020c), a road-stream crossing recorded in PSCIS as a barrier, or a modelled unassessed crossing. For Phase 2 assessments, the amount of potential habitat upstream of each crossing was estimated by measuring the amount of mainstem and stream segments > 1st order upstream of the crossing using the measure tool within QGIS (QGIS Development Team 2009).


Potential options to remediate fish passage were selected from MoE (2011) and included:

  • Removal (RM) - Complete removal of the structure and deactivation of the road.
  • Open Bottom Structure (OBS) - Replacement of the culvert with a bridge or other open bottom structure. For this project we considered bridges as the only viable option for OBS type based on consultation with FLNR road crossing engineering experts. It should be noted however, that box culverts could be considered a viable and economical option as they have been observed as successfully facilitating fish passage on the west coast of the province (Betty Rebellato, Canadian Wildlife Federation - Project Biologist).
  • Streambed Simulation (SS) - Replacement of the structure with a streambed simulation design culvert. Often achieved by embedding the culvert by 40% or more. Based on consultation with FLNR engineering experts, we considered crossings on streams with a channel width of <2m and a stream gradient of <8% as candidates for replacement with streambed simulations.
  • Additional Substrate Material (EM) - Add additional substrate to the culvert and/or downstream weir to embed culvert and reduce overall velocity/turbulence. This option was considered only when outlet drop = 0, culvert slope <1.0% and stream width ratio < 1.0.
  • Backwater (BW) - Backwatering of the structure to reduce velocity and turbulence. This option was considered only when outlet drop < 0.3m, culvert slope <2.0%, stream width ratio < 1.2 and stream profiling indicates it would be effective..


Cost estimates for structure replacement with bridges and embedded culverts were generated based on the channel width, slope of the culvert, depth of fill, road class and road surface type. Road details were sourced from FLNRORD (2020b) and FLNRORD (2020a) through bcfishpass. Interviews with Phil MacDonald, Engineering Specialist FLNR - Kootenay, Steve Page, Area Engineer - FLNR - Northern Engineering Group and Matt Hawkins - MoTi - Design Supervisor for Highway Design and Survey - Nelson were utilized to helped refine estimates. Base costs for installation of bridges on forest service roads and permit roads with surfaces specified as rough and loose was estimated at $12500/linear m and assumed that the road could be closed during construction. For streams with channel widths <2m embedded culverts were reported as an effective solution with total installation costs estimated at $25k/crossing (pers. comm. Phil MacDonald, Steve Page). A multiplier table was generated to estimate incremental cost increases due to the type of road with costs estimated for structure replacement on paved surfaces, railways and arterial/highways costing up to 20 times more than forest service roads due to expenses associate with design/engineering requirements, traffic control and paving. The cost multiplier table (Table 3.5) used for cost estimates in this study is a “rough first draft”, should be considered very approximate and refined for future projects.


Table 3.5:
Class Surface Class Multiplier Surface Multiplier Bridge $K/m Streambed Simulation $K
Forest Service Road Loose 1 1 12.5 25
Road Permit Loose 1 1 12.5 25
Unclassified Loose 1 1 12.5 25
Unclassified Rough 1 1 12.5 25
Local Loose 4 1 50.0 100
Collector Paved 4 2 100.0 200
Local Paved 4 2 100.0 200
Rail Rail 5 2 125.0 250
Arterial Paved 10 2 250.0 500
Highway Paved 10 2 250.0 500

4 Results and Discussion

Field assessments were conducted between September 16 2020 and October 17 2020 by Allan Irvine, R.P.Bio, Kyle Prince, P,Biol and Mark Fjeld, BiT.

4.1 Phase 1

A total of 72 phase 1 assessments were conducted with 17 crossings considered “passable”, 8 crossings considered ‘potential’ barriers and 43 crossings considered barriers. Site details and photos are presented in [Appendix - Phase 1 Fish Passage Assessment Data and Photos]. A rough cost benefit analysis for Phase 1 sites is presented in Table 4.1.


Barrier passability criteria used in this project follows MoE (2011), and reflects an estimation for the passage of a juvenile salmon or small resident rainbow trout (Clarkin et al. 2005 ; Bell 1991; Thompson 2013). As noted in Bourne et al. (2011), with a detailed review of different criteria in Kemp and O’Hanley (2010), passability of barriers can be quantified in many different ways. Fish physiology (i.e. species, length, swim speeds) as well as the temporal variation of physical characteristics (e.g. due to flow volumes/velocities a particular culvert is passable 50% of the time to fish with a defined physiological capacity) make defining passability difficult with important implications for watershed connectivity modelling (Bourne et al. 2011; Shaw et al. 2016; Mahlum et al. 2014; Kemp and O’Hanley 2010).


Table 4.1: Modelled upstream habitat estimate and cost benefit for Phase 1 assessments.
PSCIS ID Stream Road Stream Width (m) Priority Fix Cost Est ( $K) Habitat Upstream (m) Cost Benefit (m / $K) Cost Benefit (m2 / $K)
197525 Tributary to Elk River Spur from Elk River FSR 1.00 low RM NA 940 NA NA
197529 Littlemoor Creek Lower Elk Valley Road 1.00 low SS-CBS 500 145 0.3 0.1
197537 North Littlemoor Creek Highway 43 1.60 mod SS-CBS 500 533 1.1 0.9
197569 Tributary to Elk River Cokato Road 2.10 low OBS 1000 748 0.7 0.8
197576 Tributary to Elk River Fernie ski hill 1.40 low SS-CBS 25 58 2.3 1.6
197576 Tributary to Elk River Fernie ski hill 1.50 low SS-CBS 25 58 2.3 1.7
197576 Tributary to Elk River Fernie ski hill 1.50 low SS-CBS 25 58 2.3 1.7
197577 Tributary to Elk River Fernie ski hill 1.30 low SS-CBS 25 85 3.4 2.2
197579 Tributary to Elk River Highway 3 3.30 mod OBS 2500 1616 0.6 1.1
197580 Tributary to Elk River Dicken Rd 2.20 low OBS 1000 225 0.2 0.2
197583 Bean Creek Highway 3 3.20 mod OBS 2500 1772 0.7 1.1
NA Bean Creek Dicken Rd 2.00 mod OBS 1000 404 0.4 0.4
NA Dalzell Creek Driveway 2.50 low OBS 2500 264 0.1 0.1
NA Dalzell Creek Driveway 1.20 low SS-CBS 500 1294 2.6 1.6
NA Dalzell Creek Lower Elk Valley Road 3.80 low OBS 2500 206 0.1 0.2
NA Weigart Creek Highway 43 4.30 high OBS 250 NA NA NA
NA Brule Creek Highway 43 6.10 high OBS 305 NA NA NA
NA Tributary to Elk River Lower Elk Valley Road 0.00 low SS-CBS 500 620 1.2 0.0
NA North Littlemoor Creek Lower Elk Valley Road 1.50 low SS-CBS 500 635 1.3 1.0
NA Tributary to Elk River McGiverin Road 0.50 low SS-CBS 100 471 4.7 1.2
NA Tributary to Elk River Cokato Road 0.65 low SS-CBS 200 94 0.5 0.2
NA Whiting Creek Highway 43 0.60 low SS-CBS 500 569 1.1 0.3
NA Tributary to Elk River Highline Drive (Fernie ski hill) 2.30 mod OBS 1900 219 0.1 0.1
NA Tributary to Elk River Line creek mine road 0.50 low SS-CBS 200 492 2.5 0.6
NA Brule Creek Busato Road 7.10 high OBS 355 NA NA NA
NA Littlemoor Creek Highway 43 1.20 mod SS-CBS 500 2508 5.0 3.0
NA Hollow Creek Highway 43 1.10 low SS-CBS 500 0 0.0 0.0
NA Tributary to Elk River Cokato Road 4.10 low OBS 1000 36 0.0 0.1
NA Tributary to Whiting Creek Lower Elk Valley Road 0.50 low SS-CBS 500 273 0.5 0.1
NA Hartley Creek Dicken Road 3.50 high OBS 250 NA NA NA
NA Tributary to Elk River Railway 2.70 low OBS 500 28 0.1 0.1
NA Tributary to Grave Creek NA 1.50 low SS-CBS 25 5421 216.8 162.6
NA Tributary to Elk River Fernie Nordic Trail 2.00 mod OBS 125 1747 14.0 14.0
NA Grave Creek NA 0.10 low SS-CBS 25 181 7.2 0.4
NA Cokato Creek Cokato Road 4.50 low OBS 1000 688 0.7 1.5
NA Tributary to Elk River Hadner FSR 2.90 low OBS 162 0 0.0 0.0
NA Tributary to Elk River Elk River FSR 1.00 low SS-CBS 25 1504 60.2 30.1
NA Tributary to Elk River Elk River FSR 2.50 low OBS 125 2233 17.9 22.3
NA Tributary to Elk River Elk River FSR 2.00 low OBS 125 762 6.1 6.1
NA Crossing Creek Elk River FSR 2.50 low OBS 125 1481 11.8 14.8
NA Tributary to Elk River Elk River FSR 1.00 low SS-CBS 50 NA NA NA
NA Tributary to Elk River Elk River FSR 2.30 low OBS 125 1178 9.4 10.8
NA Tributary to Lowe Creek Elk River FSR 1.10 low SS-CBS 25 1348 53.9 29.7
NA Tributary to Elk River Elk River FSR 3.50 high OBS 625 NA NA NA
NA Tributary to Elk River Elk River FSR 3.10 low OBS 125 2865 22.9 35.5
NA Lowe Creek Elk River FSR 2.50 mod OBS 125 6563 52.5 65.6
NA Tributary to Elk River Spur from Elk River FSR 1.00 low SS-CBS 25 0 0.0 0.0
NA Tributary to Elk River Driveway 1.50 low SS-CBS 50 NA NA NA
NA Tributary to Elk R Hwy 3 2.70 low OBS 2500 195 0.1 0.1
NA Tributary to Hartley Creek Hartley Lake Rd 1.80 low SS-CBS 25 1332 53.3 48.0
NA Tributary to Hartley Creek Hartley Lake Rd 6.70 low OBS 168 484 2.9 9.7

4.2 Phase 2

Habitat confirmation assessments were conducted at 15 sites with a total of approximately 15 km of stream assessed. Five crossings were rated as high priorities for proceeding to design for replacement, Nine crossings were rated as moderate priorities for proceeding to design for replacement, 0 crossings were rated as a low priority and 1 rated as “no fix”. Results are summarized in Figure 4.1 and Tables 4.2 - 4.5 with raw habitat and fish sampling data included in digital format as Attachment 2. Detailed information for each site assessed with Phase 2 assessments is included within site specific reports included as appendices to this document.


Figure 4.1: Map of habitat confirmation sites.


Table 4.2: Overview of habitat confirmation sites.
Site Stream Road UTM (11U) Fish Species Habitat Gain (km) Habitat Value Priority Comments
50152 Tributary to Lizard Creek Mt.Fernie Park Rd 637987 5483407 (WCT) 2.7 High high Newly installed culvert with large outlet drop. Cover as undercut banks, small woody debris, large woody debris and overhanging vegetation. Numerous fry observed throughout the area surveyed and abundant gravels suitable for salmonid spawning. Highest value habitat of 4 Lizard Creek tributary streams surveyed.
50155 Tributary to Lizard Creek Island Lake Lodge Road 635113 5484261 EB, WCT 1.8 Medium moderate Frequent areas of gravels suitable for resident westslope cutthrout trout spawning and pools to 40cm deep associated with small and large woody debris. Fish sampling indicates westslope cutthrout trout fry densities lower upstream than downstream.
50159 Tributary to Lizard Creek Island Lake Lodge Road 633320 5484601 NA 0.3 Medium moderate Abundant gravels suitable for resident and fluvial westslope cutthrout trout spawning. Frequent pools to 40cm deep associated with woody debris. Within old growth cedar forest and not mapped in the freshwater atlas stream layer. Flows potentially diverted as part of a micro-hydro facilty for Island Lake Lodge.
50181 Tributary to Morrissey Creek Lodgepole FSR 648276 5468176 WCT 0.5 Medium high Boulders, small woody debris, large woody debris, undercut banks, overhanging vegetation and gravels suitable for spawning. Electrofished upstream and downstream of the crossing with westslope cutthrout trout fry, juvenile and adult fish observed downstream only. Densities of parr lower in the steeper habitat located upstream.
50185 Tributary to Morrisey Creek River Rd 645683 5469025 EB, WCT 4.5 High moderate Good flows, pools to 0.6m deep and pockets of gravel suitable for salmonid spawning throughout. Infrequent large woody debris jams to 0.5m high. Electrofishing indicated generally higher densities of fry, parr and juvenile westslope cutthrout trout downstream when compared to upstream.
50261 Tributary to Michel Creek Flathead FSR 669027 5481115 NA 0.0 Low no fix A 4.4m high chute was located 200m downstream of crossing (UTM: 11U 668858 5481210) and is considered a permanent impassable barrier to upstream migration.
62423 Harriet Lake Creek Grave Creek FSR 660508 5524239 WCT 2.3 Low moderate Crossing dry at time of survey. Incorrectly mapped as Grave Creek. Steep gradients in Harriet Lake Creek approximatlely 1km upstream.
62425 Grave Creek Spur 661486 5524426 WCT 0.2 Medium moderate Deep pools, large woody debris and boulders present. Stream is Grave Creek mainstem that has redirected from historic channel. Higher value habitat in adjacent valley channel. Crossing is 170m downstream of 62426. Westslope cutthrout density study underway within watershed by Lotic Environmental Ltd. 
62426 Grave Creek Spur 661611 5524460 WCT 1.8 Medium moderate Deep pools, large woody debris and boulders present. Habitat quality decreases with distance upstream. Upstream tributary too steep at 250m upstream. Channel is Grave Creek mainstem that has redirected from historic channel. Culvert is 170m usptream of 62425.
62516 Tributary to Lizard Creek Island Lake Lodge Road 636123 5484087 (WCT) 0.5 Medium moderate Fry observed upstream and downstream
197533 Brule Creek Busato Rd 651626 5528888 RB, WCT, BT 0.1 High high Recommend exploring deactivation as a potential remediatory action. Culvert is located 125m below crossing 197559.
197534 Weigart Creek Highway 43 650144 5532055 NA 11.6 High high Undercut banks, small woody debris, large woody debris, boulders, deep pools, and overhanging vegetation present. Abundant gravels present. Habitat increasingly complex upstream. Watershed is a habitat protection area with motor vehicle restrictions. Elk Valley Park recreation site is located downstream of the crossing.
197542 Hartley Creek Dicken Road 643534 5490723 WCT, BT, EB 7.2 High high Frequent pools formed by small and large woody debris ranging from 0.3 - 0.7m in depth. Pockets of gravels suitable for resident and fluvial salmonids. Downstream crossing on Hwy 3 is passable but requires dredging to keep clear. Historic fish density information available on Ecocat for 3 upstream sites.
197555 Tributary to Elk River Elk River FSR 646735 5554534 BT 6.0 High moderate Good flows, pools to 0.6m deep and pockets of gravel suitable for spawning. Infrequent large woody debris jams to 0.5m high. Sites electrofished upstream and downstream with one bull trout captured downstream within 315m site.
197559 Brule Creek Highway 43 651516 5528829 RB, WCT 23.0 Medium moderate Deep pools, boulders and undercut banks within wetted channel upstream. Adult westslope cutthout trout in outlet pool below hwy. Section of stream (670m) immediately upstream of Highway 43 subsurface during survey. Electrofished upstream only with no fish captured.


Table 4.3: Summary of Phase 2 fish passage reassessments.
PSCIS ID Embedded Outlet Drop (m) Diameter (m) SWR Slope (%) Length (m) Score Result
50152 No 0.90 0.9 2.9 1.5 30 37 Barrier
50155 No 0.22 0.9 2.5 2.6 11 26 Barrier
50159 No 1.60 0.8 3.1 8.0 12 36 Barrier
50181 No 0.95 1.2 2.2 7.0 30 42 Barrier
50185 No 0.00 2.2 2.0 3.4 17 29 Barrier
50261 No 1.80 2.7 1.7 12.0 19 39 Barrier
62423 No 0.18 0.9 1.6 0.5 12 21 Barrier
62425 No 0.47 1.2 3.1 7.5 12 36 Barrier
62426 No 0.25 1.2 2.9 5.0 12 31 Barrier
62516 No 0.49 1.2 2.1 5.0 11 36 Barrier
197533 No 0.70 3.3 2.2 4.0 20 39 Barrier
197534 No 0.15 3.2 1.3 3.4 18 34 Barrier
197542 No 0.40 2.6 1.3 2.0 20 34 Barrier
197555 No 1.48 1.5 2.3 3.5 49 42 Barrier
197559 Yes 0.00 2.5 2.4 2.5 35 22 Barrier


Table 4.4: Cost benefit analysis for Phase 2 assessments.
PSCIS ID Stream Road Stream Width (m) Fix Cost Est (in $K) Habitat Upstream (m) Cost Benefit (m / $K) Cost Benefit (m2 / $K)
50152 Tributary to Lizard Creek Mt.Fernie Park Rd 2.60 OBS 438 2700 6.2 8.0
50155 Tributary to Lizard Creek Island Lake Lodge Road 2.25 OBS 125 1800 14.4 16.2
50159 Tributary to Lizard Creek Island Lake Lodge Road 2.45 OBS 125 350 2.8 3.4
50181 Tributary to Morrissey Creek Lodgepole FSR 2.60 OBS 125 515 4.1 5.4
50185 Tributary to Morrisey Creek River Rd 4.30 OBS 125 4500 36.0 77.4
50261 Tributary to Michel Creek Flathead FSR 4.60 OBS 125 0 0.0 0.0
62423 Harriet Lake Creek Grave Creek FSR 1.44 SS-CBS 25 2300 92.0 66.2
62425 Grave Creek Spur 3.70 OBS 125 170 1.4 2.5
62426 Grave Creek Spur 3.50 OBS 125 1800 14.4 25.2
62516 Tributary to Lizard Creek Island Lake Lodge Road 2.47 OBS 125 540 4.3 5.3
197533 Brule Creek Busato Rd 7.10 OBS 710 125 0.2 0.6
197534 Weigart Creek Highway 43 4.30 OBS 2500 11600 4.6 10.0
197542 Hartley Creek Dicken Road 3.50 OBS 1000 7200 7.2 12.6
197555 Tributary to Elk River Elk River FSR 3.50 OBS 312 6000 19.2 33.7
197559 Brule Creek Highway 43 6.10 OBS 3050 23000 7.5 23.0


Table 4.5: Summary of Phase 2 habitat confirmation details.
Site Length Surveyed (m) Channel Width (m) Wetted Width (m) Pool Depth (m) Gradient (%) Total Cover Habitat Value
50152 675 2.6 2 0.3 3.0 moderate high
50155 700 2.2 1.6 0.3 10.5 abundant high
50159 400 3.0 2.6 0.4 11.2 moderate high
50181 515 2.9 2.2 0.3 12.4 moderate medium
50185 740 4.0 2.8 0.4 6.2 moderate high
50261 220 5.2 3.6 0.6 12.0 moderate medium
62423 725 1.2 0.8 0.2 4.4 moderate medium
62425 170 3.5 2.1 0.3 5.0 moderate high
62426 650 3.9 1.6 0.4 11.9 moderate medium
62516 730 2.0 1.3 0.3 7.6 moderate high
197533 125 5.5 3.8
1.5 moderate high
197534 1100 6.6 4.6 0.5 4.5 moderate high
197542 725 6.1 3.8 0.5 3.5 moderate high
197555 675 5.9 3.8 0.4 5.9 abundant high
197559 1600 7.7 2.3 0.6 3.5 moderate high

4.2 Fish Sampling

Fish sampling was conducted at five sites with a total of 154 westslope cutthout trout, 31 eastern brook trout and 1 bull trout captured. Westslope cutthrout trout were captured at three of the sites sampled with fork length data delineated into life stages: fry (≤60mm), parr (>60 to 110mm), juvenile (>110mm to 140mm) and adult (>140mm) by visually assessing the histogram presented in Figure 4.2. Fish sampling results are presented in detail within individual habitat confirmation site memos within the appendices of this document with westslope cutthrout trout density results also presented in Figure 4.3.


Histogram of westslope cutthrout trout captured during electrofishing surveys.

Figure 4.2: Histogram of westslope cutthrout trout captured during electrofishing surveys.


Boxplots of densities (fish/100m2) of westslope cutthrout trout captured by life stage and site for data collected during habitat confirmation assessments.

Figure 4.3: Boxplots of densities (fish/100m2) of westslope cutthrout trout captured by life stage and site for data collected during habitat confirmation assessments.

5 Recommendations

Recommended next steps for fish passage restoration in the Elk River watershed group include:

Appendix - Crossing 50152

Mt.Fernie Park Rd - Tributary to Lizard Creek

Site Location

Crossing 50152 is located on a tributary to Lizard Creek, approximately 140m upstream from the confluence with Lizard Creek and within Mt.Fernie provincial Park. This culvert has also been recorded in PSCIS as crossing 62521. The culvert is located on a paved section of Mt.Fernie Park Road (0.3km mark) and is accessed from Highway 3 within Fernie city limits. The Mt.Fernie Provincial Park is a popular recreational destination for hikers, sightseers and mountain bikers. Island Lake Lodge is located at 1400m of elevation near Island Lake and is a year round tourist destination providing accommodations, guided hiking and backcountry catskiing in the Lizard Creek watershed.


Background

The subject culvert appears to have been recently replaced with a new structure. No fisheries information was available for the stream although Lizard Creek supports westslope cutthroat trout, bull trout, mountain whitefish, brook trout, longnose sucker and longnose dace downstream (MoE 2020d, 2020b). Elk River Alliance (2020b) conducted redd surveys in Lizard Creek in 2019 along with Morrissey Creek, Coal Creek and Forsyth Creek. A total of 55 redds were observed within a 2.4km section of Lizard Creek comprising the largest densities of redds of the four tributaries surveyed (22.9 redds/km).


PSCIS stream crossing 50152 was ranked as a high priority for follow up with habitat confirmation due to the large size of the stream recorded in PSCIS (channel width = 2.4m) relative to other tributary streams in the Lizard Creek watershed and because it was rated as containing high value habitat by VAST Resource Solutions Inc. (2013) and Grainger (2011). There is a bridge located on the Lazy Lizard recreation trail approximately 150m upstream of the crossing and an unassessed modelled crossing (ID 4600926) approximately 2100m upstream which could not be accessed due to a road closure. The habitat confirmation was completed on October 16, 2020. A map of the watershed including areas surveyed is provided in Attachment 1 – Map 082G.113.


Stream Characteristics at Crossing

As noted, the culvert located at PSCIS 50152 appeared to have been replaced in 2020 with fresh rock, road fill and pavement present. At the time of the survey, the un-embedded and non-backwatered 0.9m diameter crossing was considered a barrier to upstream fish passage with a pipe length of 30m, a culvert slope of 1.5%, a stream width ratio of 2.9 and an outlet drop of 0.9m (Table 5.1). Water temperature was 5\(^\circ\)C, pH was 8.5 and conductivity was 286uS/cm.


Stream Characteristics Downstream

The stream was surveyed downstream from the culvert for 140m to Lizard Creek. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with undercut banks dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.2, Figure 5.1). The average channel width was 2.7m, the average wetted width was 2.1m and the average gradient was 4%. The dominant substrate was cobbles with gravels subdominant. Downstream of the crossing, numerous fry were observed, there were frequent sections of gravels suitable for salmonid spawning and there were no barriers or obstacles to fish passage. Habitat was rated as high value for fry/juvenile salmonid rearing.


Stream Characteristics Upstream

The stream was surveyed upstream from the culvert for 675m. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with undercut banks dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, deep pools, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.2, Figure 5.2). The average channel width was 2.6m, the average wetted width was 2m and the average gradient was 3%. There were numerous fry observed throughout the area surveyed and abundant gravels suitable for resident westslope cutthrout trout spawning were noted. Habitat value was rated as high for salmonid rearing and spawning.


Structure Remediation and Cost Estimate

Structure replacement with an open bottomed structure is recommended to provide access to the habitat located upstream of PSCIS crossing 50152. The cost of the work is estimated at $438000 for a cost benefit of $6200/linear m and $8000/m2.


Conclusion

There is 2.7km of mainstem habitat in Stove Creek upstream of crossing 50152 with habitat rated as high value for fry and juvenile salmonid rearing. Of the four streams surveyed with habitat confirmations in the Lizard Creek drainage during this project, Stove Creek contained the highest value habitat. The large outlet drop (0.9m) on the newly installed culvert prevents upstream migration by all species and life stages. This paved section of road is within Mt.Fernie Provincial Park. The crossing was ranked as a high priority for proceeding to design for replacement.


Table 5.1: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 50152.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-10-16 Crossing Sub Type Round Culvert
PSCIS ID 50152 Diameter (m) 0.9
External ID NA Length (m) 30
Crew AI, MF Embedded No
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) NA
Easting 637987 Resemble Channel No
Northing 5483407 Backwatered No
Stream Tributary to Lizard Creek Percent Backwatered NA
Road Mt.Fernie Park Rd Fill Depth (m) 5.5
Road Tenure NA Outlet Drop (m) 0.9
Channel Width (m) 2.6 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 0.4
Stream Slope (%) 3 Inlet Drop No
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 1.5
Habitat Value High Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:


Table 5.2: Summary of habitat details for PSCIS crossing 50152.
Location Length Surveyed (m) Channel Width (m) Wetted Width (m) Pool Depth (m) Gradient (%) Total Cover Habitat Value
Upstream 675 2.6 2 0.3 3 moderate high
Downstream 140 2.7 2.1 0.3 4 moderate high


Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 50152.

Figure 5.1: Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 50152.


Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 50152.

Figure 5.2: Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 50152.

Appendix - Crossing 50155

Island Lake Lodge Road - Tributary to Lizard Creek

Site Location

Crossing 50155 is located on a tributary to Lizard Creek, approximately 75m upstream from the confluence with Lizard Creek. The stream is located approximately 100m east of the location where it is mapped on the freshwater atlas stream layer. The culvert is located at km 3.6 of Island Lake Lodge Road which is an extension of Mt.Fernie Park Road with access from Highway 3 located within Fernie city limits. The area is a popular recreational destination for hikers and mountain bikers. Island Lake Lodge is a year round tourist destination in the Lizard Creek watershed providing accommodations, guided hiking and backcountry catskiing for clients.


Background

At the crossing location, the stream is 2nd order with a watershed area upstream of the road of approximately 1.8km2. The elevation of the watershed ranges from a maximum of 1945m to 1080m at the culvert. One 12m long bridge (PSCIS 197543) is located upstream of the subject crossing approximately 575m on the Lazy Lizard bike trail and another 7m long bridge structure is located downstream also on a recreational trail. A search of provincial records yielded no fisheries information for the stream (MoE 2020d). Downstream, Lizard Creek supports westslope cutthroat trout, bull trout, mountain whitefish, brook trout, longnose sucker and longnose dace (MoE 2020b). Elk River Alliance (2020b) conducted redd surveys in Lizard Creek in 2019 along with Morrissey Creek, Coal Creek and Forsyth Creek. A total of 55 redds were observed within a 2.4km section of Lizard Creek comprising the largest densities of redds of the four tributaries surveyed (22.9 redds/km).


PSCIS stream crossing 50155 was ranked as a high priority for follow up with habitat confirmation due to the large size of the stream relative to other tributary streams in the watershed, the previously rated high value habitat and because it was prioritized for follow up by VAST Resource Solutions Inc. (2013). The habitat confirmation was completed on September 22, 2020. A map of the watershed including areas surveyed is provided in Attachment 1 – Map 082G.113.


Stream Characteristics at Crossing

At the time of the survey, the un-embedded and non-backwatered 0.9m diameter crossing was considered a barrier to upstream fish passage with a pipe length of 11m, a culvert slope of 2.6%, a stream width ratio of 2.5 an outlet drop of 0.22m (Table 5.3). Water temperature was 9\(^\circ\)C, pH was 7.7 and conductivity was 480uS/cm.


Stream Characteristics Downstream

The stream was surveyed downstream from the culvert for 100m to Lizard Creek. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with undercut banks dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.8, Figure 5.4). The average channel width was 2.2m, the average wetted width was 1.9m and the average gradient was 4.3%. Habitat value was rated as medium with good potential for fry/juvenile salmonid rearing but a lack of deep pools for adult overwintering and rearing.


Stream Characteristics Upstream

The stream was surveyed upstream from the culvert for 700m. Overall, total cover amount was rated as abundant with deep pools dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, boulders, undercut banks, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.8, Figure 5.5). The average channel width was 2.2m, the average wetted width was 1.6m and the average gradient was 10.5%. Frequent areas of gravels suitable for resident westslope cutthrout trout spawning and pools to 40cm deep associated with small and large woody debris were present throughout areas surveyed. Habitat value was rated as high for fry and juvenile westslope cutthrout rearing.


Fish Sampling

To assess potential impacts of the culvert on fish densities in the stream we electrofished upstream and downstream of the crossing. Three sites were sampled upstream and one site was sampled downstream. A total of 42 westslope cutthrout trout and 4 eastern brook trout were captured upstream with 28 westslope cutthrout trout and 2 eastern brook trout captured downstream. Raw results are included in digital format as Attachment 2 and summarized in Tables 5.5 - 5.6 and Figure 5.3.


Structure Remediation and Cost Estimate

Structure replacement with an open bottomed culvert is recommended to provide unconstained access to the habitat located upstream of PSCIS crossing 50155. The cost for work is estimated at $125000 for a cost benefit of $14400/linear m and $16200/m2.

Conclusion

There is an estimated 1.8km of mainstem habitat upstream of crossing 50155 with habitat in the areas surveyed rated as high value for fry and juvenile salmonid rearing. Although potentially attributable to lower gradient habitat and closer proximity to the Lizard Creek mainstem, fish sampling results demonstrated that westslope cutthrout trout fry densities were lower upstream of the crossing than below. The road may be permitted to Island Lake Lodge or solely the responsibility of the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations & Rural Development. The crossing was ranked as a moderate priority for proceeding to design for replacement with an open bottomed structure.


Table 5.3: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 50155.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-09-22 Crossing Sub Type Round Culvert
PSCIS ID 50155 Diameter (m) 0.9
External ID NA Length (m) 11
Crew KP, AI Embedded No
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) NA
Easting 635113 Resemble Channel No
Northing 5484261 Backwatered No
Stream Tributary to Lizard Creek Percent Backwatered NA
Road Island Lake Lodge Road Fill Depth (m) 0.3
Road Tenure MoTi recreation Outlet Drop (m) 0.22
Channel Width (m) 2.25 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 0.45
Stream Slope (%) 4.3 Inlet Drop Yes
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 2.6
Habitat Value Medium Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:


Table 5.4: Summary of habitat details for PSCIS crossing 50155.
Location Length Surveyed (m) Channel Width (m) Wetted Width (m) Pool Depth (m) Gradient (%) Total Cover Habitat Value
Upstream 700 2.2 1.6 0.3 10.5 abundant high
Downstream 100 2.2 1.9
4.3 moderate medium


Table 5.5: Electrofishing sites for PSCIS crossing 50155.
Site Location Width (m) Length (m) Area (m2) Effort (s) Effort (s/m2)
19 Downstream 1.7 40 68 200 2.9
18 Upstream 1.6 25 40 117 2.9
33 Upstream 1.6 13 21 61 2.9
34 Upstream 1.6 45 72 154 2.1


Table 5.6: Westslope cuthrout trout densities (fish/100m2) for PSCIS crossing 50155.
Site Location Fry Parr Adult Juvenile
19 Downstream 35.3 4.4 1.5
18 Upstream 15 12.5
33 Upstream 23.8 9.5
9.5
34 Upstream 23.6 5.6 1.4


Fish densities (fish/100m2) for PSCIS crossing 50155.

Figure 5.3: Fish densities (fish/100m2) for PSCIS crossing 50155.


Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 50155.

Figure 5.4: Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 50155.


Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 50155.

Figure 5.5: Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 50155.

Appendix - Crossing 50159

Island Lake Lodge Road - Tributary to Lizard Creek

Site Location

Crossing 50159 is located on a tributary to Lizard Creek, approximately 150m upstream from the confluence with Lizard Creek. This crossing has also been recorded in PSCIS as crossing 62510. The culvert is located at approximately 5.5km up Island Lake Lodge Road which is an extension of Mt.Fernie Park Road. The area is accessed off of Highway 3 within Fernie city limits and is a popular recreational destination for hikers, skiers and mountain bikers. Island Lake Lodge is located at 1400m of elevation near Island Lake and is a year round tourist destination providing accommodations, guided hiking and backcountry catskiing for clients. The subject stream is not mapped in the freshwater atlas stream layer and may have been diverted as part of a micro-hydro facilty for Island Lake Lodge. A small building that may be a generating station was observed on aerial imagery approximately 1500m upstream of the road.


Background

At the crossing location, the stream had good flow and is located within an area of old growth cedar adjacent to a recreation trail. At the time of the survey the stream was the highest volume tributary to Lizard Creek located on the east side of the valley. No fisheries information was available for the stream (MoE 2020d), however, Lizard Creek supports westslope cutthroat trout, bull trout, mountain whitefish, brook trout, longnose sucker and longnose dace (MoE 2020b). Elk River Alliance (2020b) conducted redd surveys in Lizard Creek in 2019 along with Morrissey Creek, Coal Creek and Forsyth Creek. A total of 55 redds were observed within a 2.4km section of Lizard Creek comprising the largest densities of redds of the four tributaries surveyed (22.9 redds/km).


PSCIS stream crossing 50159 was ranked as a high priority for follow up with habitat confirmation due to the relatively large size of the stream recorded in PSCIS (channel width = 3.5m) relative to other tributary streams in the Lizard Creek watershed and because it was rated as containing high value habitat by VAST Resource Solutions Inc. (2013) and Grainger (2011). The habitat confirmation was completed on September 22, 2020. A map of the watershed including areas surveyed is provided in Attachment 1 – Map 082G.113.


Stream Characteristics at Crossing

At the time of the survey, the un-embedded and non-backwatered 0.8m diameter crossing was considered a barrier to upstream fish passage with a pipe length of 12m, a culvert slope of 8%, a stream width ratio of 3.1 and an outlet drop of 1.6m (Table 5.7). Water temperature was 10\(^\circ\)C, pH was 7.6 and conductivity was 729uS/cm.


Stream Characteristics Downstream

The stream was surveyed downstream from the culvert for 150m to Lizard Creek. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with large woody debris dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, deep pools, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.4, Figure 5.4). The average channel width was 2.5m, the average wetted width was 2.3m and the average gradient was 8.8%. The dominant substrate was gravels with cobbles subdominant. Some small pools and steps of 0.2 - 0.6m in height were present throughout the area surveyed. Large woody debris steps ranging from 0.4 - 0.8m high were spaced sporadically throughout area surveyed. The stream contained relatively flatter sections from 3 - 8% and steeper sections of 15 - 18% for first 350m above culvert (UTM: 11 U 632810 5484842) where the stream becomes too steep for upstream salmonid passage (35%). Habitat value was rated as moderate for salmonid fry/juvenile rearing and high value habitat for spawning.


Stream Characteristics Upstream

The stream was surveyed upstream from the culvert for 400m. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with undercut banks dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, and deep pools (Table 5.4, Figure 5.5). The average channel width was 3m, the average wetted width was 2.6m and the average gradient was 11.2%. There were abundant gravels suitable for resident and fluvial westslope cutthrout trout spawning. Frequent pools to 40cm deep were present and associated with small and large woody debris. Habitat was rated as high value for salmonid rearing and spawning.



Structure Remediation and Cost Estimate

Structure replacement with a bridge is recommended to provide access to the habitat located upstream of PSCIS crossing 50159. The cost for the work is estimated at $125000 for a cost benefit of $2800/linear m and $3400/m2.



Conclusion

There is 0.3km of habitat upstream of crossing 50159 within old growth cedar riparian forest before the stream becomes too steep for upstream fish migration (>20%). The habitat upstream of the crossing was rated as high value for salmonid rearing and spawning with good flows, large woody debris throughout and abundant gravels suitable for spawning. The subject stream is not mapped in the freshwater atlas stream layer and may have been diverted from upstream flows as part of a micro-hydro facilty for Island Lake Lodge. The road may be permitted to Island Lake Lodge or solely the responsibility of the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations & Rural Development. The crossing was ranked as a moderate priority for proceeding to design for replacement with an open bottomed structure. Elecrofishing upstream and downstream of the crossing is recommended to determine utilization of habitat before and after restorative measures.

Table 5.7: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 50159.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-09-22 Crossing Sub Type Round Culvert
PSCIS ID 50159 Diameter (m) 0.8
External ID NA Length (m) 12
Crew KP, AI Embedded No
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) NA
Easting 633320 Resemble Channel No
Northing 5484601 Backwatered No
Stream Tributary to Lizard Creek Percent Backwatered NA
Road Island Lake Lodge Road Fill Depth (m) 1
Road Tenure MoTi recreation Outlet Drop (m) 1.6
Channel Width (m) 2.45 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 0
Stream Slope (%) 9 Inlet Drop Yes
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 8
Habitat Value Medium Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:
Table 5.8: Summary of habitat details for PSCIS crossing 50159.
Location Length Surveyed (m) Channel Width (m) Wetted Width (m) Pool Depth (m) Gradient (%) Total Cover Habitat Value
Upstream 400 3.0 2.6 0.4 11.2 moderate high
Downstream 150 2.5 2.3 0.2 8.8 moderate high


Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 50159.

Figure 5.6: Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 50159.


Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 50159.

Figure 5.7: Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 50159.

Appendix - Crossing 50181

Lodgepole FSR - Tributary to Morrissey Creek

Site Location

Crossing 50181 is located on a tributary to Morrissey Creek, approximately 200m upstream from the confluence with a tributary to Morrissey Creek. The crossing is located on Lodgepole FSR just south of Morrissey approximately 15km south of Fernie. Lodgepole FSR is a gravel forest tenure road with active log hauling at the time of the survey. This crossing is on a stream that flows into the Morrissey Creek tributary approximately 2.7km upstream of where PSCIS crossing 50185 on River Road was also surveyed with a habitat confirmation assessment (Appendix - Crossing 50185).


Background

At the crossing location, the stream is third order with a watershed area upstream of the road of approximately 3.4 km2. The elevation of the watershed ranges from a maximum of 2100 to 1200m at the culvert. Upstream of the crossing, although there are four fords documented in PSCIS there are no other road-stream crossing barriers. No fisheries information was available for the stream (MoE 2020d) however westslope cutthroat trout, bull trout, mountain whitefish, brook trout, longnose sucker and longnose dace have been recorded downstream in Morrissey Creek (MoE 2020b). Elk River Alliance (2020b) conducted redd surveys in Morrissey Creek in 2019 with a total of 7 redds observed within a 3.6km of stream surveyed.


PSCIS stream crossing 50181 was ranked as a high priority for follow up with habitat confirmation due to the relatively large channel width (3.7m) and the previously rated high value habitat reported in PSCIS from Grainger (2011). The habitat confirmation was completed on October 15, 2020. A map of the watershed including areas surveyed is provided in Attachment 1 – Map 082G.108.


Stream Characteristics at Crossing

At the time of the survey, the un-embedded and non-backwatered 1.2m diameter crossing was considered a barrier to upstream fish passage with a pipe length of 30m, a culvert slope of 7%, a stream width ratio of 2.2 and an outlet drop of 0.95m (Table 5.9). Water temperature was 4\(^\circ\)C, pH was 8.4 and conductivity was 292uS/cm.


Stream Characteristics Downstream

The stream was surveyed downstream from the culvert for 200m to the confluence with the downstream channel. The mouth of the stream is located approximately 100m east of where it is mapped on the freshwater atlas stream layer. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with large woody debris dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, boulders, undercut banks, deep pools, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.10, Figure 5.9). The average channel width was 4m, the average wetted width was 2.2m and the average gradient was 8%. The dominant substrate was boulders with cobbles subdominant. Intermittent smaller pools and pockets of gravels suitably sized for resident salmonid spawning were present. Habitat was rated as medium value for fry/juvenile salmonid rearing.


Stream Characteristics Upstream

The stream was surveyed upstream from the culvert for 515m. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with boulders dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, undercut banks, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.10, Figure 5.10). The average channel width was 2.9m, the average wetted width was 2.2m and the average gradient was 12.4%. The dominant substrate was cobbles with boulders subdominant. Good flows were present and some pockets of gravels suitable for spawning were observed throughout. There were steps ranging from 0.5 - 0.8m due to large woody debris jams but no permanent migration barriers were observed until a cascade at the top end of the survey area (24% for >50m). Habitat was rated as medium value for fry and juvenile westslope cutthrout trout rearing.


Fish Sampling

To confirm fish presence and assess potential impacts of the culvert on fish densities in the stream, electrofishing was conducted upstream and downstream of the crossing. One site was sampled downstream and one site was sampled upstream. A total of 6 westslope cutthrout trout were captured upstream and 15 were captured downstream (Figure 5.11). Raw results are included in digital format as Attachment 2 and summarized in Tables 5.11 - 5.12 and Figure 5.8.


Structure Remediation and Cost Estimate

Structure replacement with an open bottomed structure is recommended to provide access to the habitat located upstream of PSCIS crossing 50181. The cost of the work is estimated at $125000 for a cost benefit of $4100/linear m and $5400/m2.


Conclusion

There is an estimated 0.5km of mainstem habitat upstream of crossing 50181 with habitat in the areas surveyed upstream of the crossing rated as medium value for fry and juvenile salmonid rearing. Density of westslope cutthrout trout parr was higher in the site sampled downstream of the crossing when compared to the upstream site with fry, juvenile and adult fish captured downstren only. The Lodgepole FSR is under tenure of the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations & Rural Development. The crossing was ranked as a high priority for proceeding to design for replacement with an open bottomed structure and consideration of remediation of PSCIS 50185 (Appendix - Crossing 50185) should be considered at the same time for maximum potential benefits.

Table 5.9: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 50181.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-10-15 Crossing Sub Type Round Culvert
PSCIS ID 50181 Diameter (m) 1.2
External ID NA Length (m) 30
Crew MF, AI Embedded No
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) NA
Easting 648276 Resemble Channel No
Northing 5468176 Backwatered No
Stream Tributary to Morrissey Creek Percent Backwatered NA
Road Lodgepole FSR Fill Depth (m) 3
Road Tenure NA Outlet Drop (m) 0.95
Channel Width (m) 2.6 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 0.18
Stream Slope (%) 7 Inlet Drop No
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 7
Habitat Value Medium Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:
Table 5.10: Summary of habitat details for PSCIS crossing 50181.
Location Length Surveyed (m) Channel Width (m) Wetted Width (m) Pool Depth (m) Gradient (%) Total Cover Habitat Value
Upstream 515 2.9 2.2 0.3 12.4 moderate medium
Downstream 200 4.0 2.2 0.3 8.0 moderate medium


Table 5.11: Electrofishing sites for PSCIS crossing 50181.
Site Location Width (m) Length (m) Area (m2) Effort (s) Effort (s/m2)
47 Downstream 2.2 150 330 840 2.5
46 Upstream 2.2 130 286 651 2.3
Table 5.12: Westslope cuthrout trout densities (fish/100m2) for PSCIS crossing 50181.
Site Location Fry Parr Juvenile
47 Downstream 0.6 3.3 0.6
46 Upstream
2.1


Fish densities (fish/100m2) for PSCIS crossing 50181.

Figure 5.8: Fish densities (fish/100m2) for PSCIS crossing 50181.


Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 50181.

Figure 5.9: Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 50181.


Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 50181.

Figure 5.10: Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 50181.


Westslope cutthrout trout captured upstream of PSCIS crossing 50181.

Figure 5.11: Westslope cutthrout trout captured upstream of PSCIS crossing 50181.

Appendix - Crossing 50185

River Rd - Tributary to Morrisey Creek

Site Location

Crossing 50185 is located on a tributary to Morrisey Creek, approximately 255m upstream from the confluence with Morrisey Creek. The crossing is located at km 14.5 on River Road just south of Morrissey approximately 15km south of Fernie. The road is accessed off of Lodgepole FSR via the Morrissey Bridge over the Elk River adjacent to Highway 3. River Road is a gravel forest tenure road (forest file id 5466 with active log hauling at the time of the survey. PSCIS crossing 50181 on an upstream tributary located approximately 2.7km upstream was also surveyed with a habitat confirmation assessment (Appendix - Crossing 50181).


Background

At the crossing location, the stream is 4th order with a watershed area upstream of the road of approximately 12km2. The elevation of the watershed ranges from a maximum of 2000 to 970m at the culvert. Upstream of the crossing, there are no anthropogenic barriers on the mainstem however PSCIS crossing 50181 (also recorded as PSCIS 103033) is documented as a barrier located on a significantly sized tributary entering the stream from the north-east approximately 2.8km upstream of River Road. A wetland type area is mapped at the top of the watershed (area NAha). No fisheries information was available for the stream (MoE 2020d) however westslope cutthroat trout, bull trout, mountain whitefish, brook trout, longnose sucker and longnose dace have been recorded downstream in Morrissey Creek (MoE 2020b). Elk River Alliance (2020b) conducted redd surveys in Morrissey Creek in 2019 with a total of 7 redds observed within a 3.6km of stream surveyed.


PSCIS stream crossing 50185 was ranked as a high priority for follow up with habitat confirmation due to the large size of the stream relative to other tributary streams in the watershed, the moderate value habitat rating by VAST Resource Solutions Inc. (2013) and because VAST Resource Solutions Inc. (2013) noted that the culvert was a good candidate for RPBio assessment. The habitat confirmation was completed on September 21, 2020. A map of the watershed including areas surveyed is provided in Attachment 1 – Map 082G.108.


Stream Characteristics at Crossing

At the time of the survey, the un-embedded and non-backwatered 2.2m diameter crossing was considered a barrier to upstream fish passage with a pipe length of 17m, a culvert slope of 3.4%, a stream width ratio of 2 and an outlet drop of 0m (Table 5.13). Water temperature was 9\(^\circ\)C, pH was 7.6 and conductivity was 378uS/cm. It appeared as though fish passage restoration works had taken place at the site historically as there were what appeared to be boulder riffle structures installed downstream of the crossing. The structures appeared to be effective at reducing the outlet drop size but had created a rock drop (0.4m) and were not resulting in backwatering of the culvert.


Stream Characteristics Downstream

The stream was surveyed downstream from the culvert for 255m to the confluence with Morrisey Creek. The mouth of the stream is located approximately 500m upstream from the confluence of Morrissey Creek and the Elk River. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with small woody debris dominant. Cover was also present as large woody debris, undercut banks, deep pools, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.14, Figure 5.13). The average channel width was 4.3m, the average wetted width was 2.7m and the average gradient was 4.2%. The dominant substrate was cobbles with gravels subdominant. There were frequent pools formed by small and large woody debris ranging from 0.3 - 0.75m in depth (average residual depth = 0.4m). Pockets of small gravels suitable for resident salmonid spawning were also present. Habitat value was rated as high with good potential for fry/juvenile salmonid rearing.


Stream Characteristics Upstream

The stream was surveyed upstream from the culvert for 740m. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with small woody debris dominant. Cover was also present as large woody debris, undercut banks, deep pools, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.14, Figure 5.14). The average channel width was 4m, the average wetted width was 2.8m and the average gradient was 6.2%. The dominant substrate was cobbles with gravels subdominant. The stream had good flows with fry observed throughout the area surveyed. Pools to 0.6m deep were present with pockets of gravel suitable for salmonid spawning throughout. Infrequent large woody debris jams to 0.5m high were also observed. Habitat value was rated as high for fry and juvenile westslope cutthrout trout rearing.


Fish Sampling

To assess potential impacts of the culvert on fish densities in the stream electrofishing was conducted upstream and downstream of the crossing. Five sites were sampled downstream and five sites were sampled upstream. A total of 37 westslope cutthrout trout and 22 eastern brook trout were captured upstream with 26 westslope cutthrout trout and 3 eastern brook trout captured downstream (Figure 5.15). Raw results are included in digital format as Attachment 2 and summarized in Tables 5.15 - 5.16 and Figure 5.12.


Structure Remediation and Cost Estimate

Structure replacement with an open bottomed structure is recommended to provide access to the habitat located upstream of PSCIS crossing 50185. The cost of the work is estimated at $125000 for a cost benefit of $36000/linear m and $77400/m2.


Conclusion

There is an estimated 4.5km of mainstem habitat upstream of crossing 50185 with habitat in the areas surveyed upstream of the crossing rated as high value for fry and juvenile salmonid rearing. Fish sampling indicated generally higher densities of fry, parr and juvenile westslope cutthrout trout downstream when compared to upstream. River Road is under tenure of the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations & Rural Development. The crossing was ranked as a moderate priority for proceeding to design for replacement with an open bottomed structure.

Table 5.13: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 50185.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-09-21 Crossing Sub Type Round Culvert
PSCIS ID 50185 Diameter (m) 2.2
External ID NA Length (m) 17
Crew KP, AI Embedded No
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) NA
Easting 645683 Resemble Channel No
Northing 5469025 Backwatered No
Stream Tributary to Morrisey Creek Percent Backwatered NA
Road River Rd Fill Depth (m) 1.4
Road Tenure FLNR 5466 Outlet Drop (m) 0
Channel Width (m) 4.3 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 0
Stream Slope (%) 4.3 Inlet Drop No
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 3.4
Habitat Value High Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:
Table 5.14: Summary of habitat details for PSCIS crossing 50185.
Location Length Surveyed (m) Channel Width (m) Wetted Width (m) Pool Depth (m) Gradient (%) Total Cover Habitat Value
Upstream 740 4.0 2.8 0.4 6.2 moderate high
Downstream 255 4.3 2.7 0.4 4.2 moderate high


Table 5.15: Electrofishing sites for PSCIS crossing 50185.
Site Location Width (m) Length (m) Area (m2) Effort (s) Effort (s/m2)
24 Downstream 2.70 40 108 361 3.3
25 Downstream 2.25 7 16 70 4.4
26 Downstream 2.60 3 8 36 4.5
27 Downstream 2.60 3 8 57 7.1
28 Downstream 3.10 7 22 170 7.7
29 Upstream 2.90 40 116 361 3.1
30 Upstream 2.67 13 35 123 3.5
31 Upstream 2.80 13 36 63 1.8
32 Upstream 4.47 18 80 223 2.8
48 Upstream 2.80 60 168 521 3.1
Table 5.16: Westslope cuthrout trout densities (fish/100m2) for PSCIS crossing 50185.
Site Location Fry Parr Juvenile
24 Downstream 0.9 2.8
25 Downstream 18.8
26 Downstream 12.5 37.5
27 Downstream
25 12.5
28 Downstream 50 4.5
29 Upstream 4.3 0.9
30 Upstream
5.7
31 Upstream 2.8
32 Upstream 22.5 2.5
48 Upstream 2.4 1.8 0.6


Fish densities (fish/100m2) for PSCIS crossing 50185.

Figure 5.12: Fish densities (fish/100m2) for PSCIS crossing 50185.


Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 50185.

Figure 5.13: Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 50185.


Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 50185.

Figure 5.14: Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 50185.


Westslope cutthrout trout captured upstream of PSCIS crossing 50185.

Figure 5.15: Westslope cutthrout trout captured upstream of PSCIS crossing 50185.

Appendix - Crossing 50261

Flathead FSR - Tributary to Michel Creek

Site Location

Crossing 50261 is located on a tributary to Michel Creek, approximately 210m upstream from the confluence with the Michel Creek. The crossing is located at 7.6km on the Flathead FSR accessed from Coal Mountain.


Background

At the crossing location, the stream is third order with a watershed area upstream of the road of approximately 5.4 km2. The elevation of the watershed ranges from a maximum of 2600 to 1700m at the culvert. There is one crossing modelled downstream of PCSIS 50261 (4600837) and one modelled above (4602097). There was no fisheries information available for the watershed (MoE 2020d, 2020b).


PSCIS stream crossing 50261 was ranked as a moderate priority for follow up with habitat confirmation due to the relatively large amount of potential habitat modelled as suitable for westslope cutthrout trout occupancy (<20% for ~3km) located upstream and a medium habitat value ranking by Grainger (2011). The habitat confirmation was completed on October 17, 2020. A map of the watershed including areas surveyed is provided in Attachment 1 – Map 082G.114.


Stream Characteristics at Crossing

At the time of the survey, the three un-embedded and non-backwatered 2.7m diameter crossings were considered a barrier to upstream fish passage with a pipe lengths of 19m, culvert slopes of 12%, a stream width ratio of 1.7 and outlet drops of 1.8m (Table 5.17). Water temperature was 1\(^\circ\)C, pH was 8.5 and conductivity was 320uS/cm.


Stream Characteristics Downstream

The stream was surveyed downstream from the culvert for 210m. Overall total cover amount was rated as moderate with boulders dominant. Cover was also present as large woody debris, undercut banks, deep pools, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.18, Figure 5.16). The average channel width was 4.4m, the average wetted width was 2.5m and the average gradient was 15%. The dominant substrate was boulders with cobbles subdominant. Some intermittedt pools were present with occasional pockets of gravel suitable for spawning. A 4.4m high chute was located 200m downstream of crossing (UTM: 11U 668858 5481210) and is considered a permanent impassable barrier to upstream migration (Figure 5.17.



Stream Characteristics Upstream

The stream was surveyed immediately upstream from the culvert for 210m. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with deep pools dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, boulders, undercut banks, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.18, Figure 5.18). The average channel width was 5.2m, the average wetted width was 3.6m and the average gradient was 12%. The dominant substrate was large rock/bedrock with boulders subdominant. Overall, habitat was rated as medium value. There were multiple natural barriers to upstream fish passage within the area surveyed that were considered too steep for upstream migration by any species.


Conclusion

The chute located 200m downstream of PSCIS 50261 is an impassable barrier to upstream migration and negates the value in restoring passage at the crossing. It is recommended that the crossing not proceed to design for remeiation of fish passage at the site.

Table 5.17: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 50261.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-10-17 Crossing Sub Type Round Culvert
PSCIS ID 50261 Diameter (m) 2.7
External ID NA Length (m) 19
Crew AI, MF Embedded No
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) NA
Easting 669027 Resemble Channel No
Northing 5481115 Backwatered No
Stream Tributary to Michel Creek Percent Backwatered NA
Road Flathead FSR Fill Depth (m) 3
Road Tenure NA Outlet Drop (m) 1.8
Channel Width (m) 4.6 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 0
Stream Slope (%) 12 Inlet Drop Yes
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 12
Habitat Value Low Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:
Table 5.18: Summary of habitat details for PSCIS crossing 50261.
Location Length Surveyed (m) Channel Width (m) Wetted Width (m) Pool Depth (m) Gradient (%) Total Cover Habitat Value
Upstream 220 5.2 3.6 0.6 12 moderate medium
Downstream 210 4.4 2.5 0.2 15 moderate medium


Habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 50261.

Figure 5.16: Habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 50261.


Chute barrier located 200 downstream of PSCIS crossing 50261.

Figure 5.17: Chute barrier located 200 downstream of PSCIS crossing 50261.


Habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 50261.

Figure 5.18: Habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 50261.

Appendix - Crossing 62423

Grave Creek FSR - Harriet Lake Creek

Site Location

Crossing 62423 is located on Harriet Lake Creek, approximately 30m upstream from the confluence with Grave Creek and accessed from Grave Creek Forest Service Road. Although the freshwater atlas stream layer mapping incorrectly indicates the subject stream is the mainstem of Grave Creek it is actually a small drainage that joins Harriet Lake Creek which flows primarily from the 6ha Harriet Lake located to the north at an elevation of 2100m approximately 4km upstream of the crossing.


Background

Harriet Lake was stocked with “wild” westslope cutthrout trout five times between 1985 and 2002 (MoE 2020a). Downstream, Grave Creek is known to contain westslope cutthrout trout, rainbow trout and bull trout (MoE 2020b). Two habitat confirmation assessments were conducted downstream on the mainstem of Grave Creek in 2014 at PSCIS crossings 62421 and 62422 (Masse Environmental Consultants Ltd. 2015). Although Heather Lamson - MoE Fisheries Biologist recommended the culverts not be removed to prevent potential hybridization of westslope cutthrout trout with stocked rainbow trout downstream (Masse Environmental Consultants Ltd. 2015), both structures had been replaced with bridges at the time of the surveys. Designs and remediations of these crossings were not recorded in PSCIS. Reassessments of these crossings were conducted by our team in 2020 and results will be loaded to PSCIS. In the field, Lotic Environmental Ltd. field teams were observed conducting two-pass closed site electrofishing in Grave Creek as part of a westslope cutthrout trout population assessment and aquatic monitoring program. Data from the program is uploaded to the Fisheries Information Summary System annually and is made available through the BC Data Catalog (MoE 2020b, 2020d).


Although the modelling of potential habitat upstream of this crossing was considered not accurate due to the incorrect mapping of Grave Creek, during field work planning, PSCIS stream crossing 62423 was ranked as a high priority for follow up with habitat confirmation due to the large size of the modelled stream network upstream (20km) and because it was located on a stream with habitat rated as moderate value by VAST Resource Solutions Inc. (2013). A bridge (PSCIS 62413) is located approximately 1km upstream of the crossing. The habitat confirmation was completed on September 20, 2020. A map of the watershed including areas surveyed is provided in Attachment 1 – Map 082G.124.


Stream Characteristics at Crossing

At the time of the survey, the un-embedded and non-backwatered 0.9m diameter crossing was considered a barrier to upstream fish passage with a pipe length of 12m, a culvert slope of 0.5%, a stream width ratio of 1.6 and an outlet drop of 0.18m (Table 5.19). The stream was dry at the crossing location at the time of the survey.


Stream Characteristics Downstream

The stream was surveyed downstream from the culvert for 30m to Grave Creek. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with overhanging vegetation dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris and boulders (Table 5.20, Figure 5.20). The average channel width was 1.3m, and the average gradient was 4%. The dominant substrate was cobbles with boulders subdominant. Habitat value was rated as low value due to a lack of flow.


Stream Characteristics Upstream

The stream was surveyed upstream from the culvert in the general location of the mapped Grave Creek streamline for 725m. As Harriet Lake Creek was the primary source of flow for the area and enters the surveyed tributary 150m upstream of the crossing location, flows were very minimal and substrate was primarily fines above its confluence. There was however, a visible channel in this location with a ford (PSCIS 197563) located approximately 600m upstream fo PSCSIS 62423. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with undercut banks dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, and boulders (Table 5.20, Figure 5.19). The average channel width was 1.2m, the average wetted width was 0.8m and the average gradient was 4.4%. Harriet Lake Creek gradients modelled at 19% just upstream of the bridge located 1km upstream and too steep for upstream westslope cutthrout passage (>20%) at 2.2km. Habitat value was rated as medium for fry and juvenile westslope cutthrout rearing in Harriet Creek and low in the unnamed tributary mapped as Grave Creek due to a lack of flow.


Structure Remediation and Cost Estimate

Structure replacement with an embedded culvert is recommended to provide access to the habitat located upstream of PSCIS crossing 62423. The cost for the work is estimated at $25000 for a cost benefit of $92000/linear m and $66200/m2.

Conclusion

There is 2.3km of mainstem habitat upstream of crossing 62423 with habitat in the areas surveyed upstream of the crossing rated as medium value. Although the provincial forest tenure road layer does not include Grave Creek FSR, it is likely that it is a tenure road under the responsibility of the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development. The crossing was ranked as a moderate priority for proceeding to design for replacement with an open bottomed structure due to the low water conditions and steep gradients upstream in Harriet Lake Creek.


Table 5.19: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 62423.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-09-20 Crossing Sub Type Round Culvert
PSCIS ID 62423 Diameter (m) 0.9
External ID NA Length (m) 12
Crew KP, AI Embedded No
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) NA
Easting 660508 Resemble Channel No
Northing 5524239 Backwatered No
Stream Harriet Lake Creek Percent Backwatered NA
Road Grave Creek FSR Fill Depth (m) 0.3
Road Tenure Unknown Outlet Drop (m) 0.18
Channel Width (m) 1.44 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 0.6
Stream Slope (%) 4 Inlet Drop Yes
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 0.5
Habitat Value Low Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:


Table 5.20: Summary of habitat details for PSCIS crossing 62423.
Location Length Surveyed (m) Channel Width (m) Wetted Width (m) Pool Depth (m) Gradient (%) Total Cover Habitat Value
Downstream 30 1.3
4.0 moderate low
Upstream 725 1.2 0.8 0.2 4.4 moderate medium


Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 62423.

Figure 5.19: Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 62423.


Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 62423.

Figure 5.20: Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 62423.

Appendix - Crossings 62425 and 62426

Spur - Grave Creek

Site Location

PSCIS crossings 62425 and 62426 are located on Grave Creek, approximately 75m and 185m upstream from where Grave Creek splits into two channels with the majority of flow originating from the other channel flowing from the south. Of note, the confluence of Grave Creek and the other channel is located approximately 175 to the west of where the confluence is mapped - likely due to a channel redirection approximately 375m upstream that appears to have occurred due to a large woody debris jam. Three PSCIS crossings (62427, 62428 and 62429) and one un-assessed modelled crossing (modelled ID 4601159) are located upstream of 62426 however, there are very minimal quantities of potential habitat upstream of their locations. Although mapped within the digital road atlas it is suspected that the road on which both culverts are located is a forest tenure road (Canfor Forest Products Ltd. tenure) as it is located immediately adjacent to another forest tenure road and within an area utilized for forestry.


Background

Grave Creek is known to contain westslope cutthrout trout, rainbow trout and bull trout downstream of the subject culverts and westslope cutthrout trout above (MoE 2020b). Two habitat confirmation assessments were conducted downstream on the mainstem of Grave Creek in 2014 at PSCIS crossings 62421 and 62422 (Masse Environmental Consultants Ltd. 2015). Although Heather Lamson - MoE Fisheries Biologist recommended the culverts not be removed to prevent potential hybridization of westslope cutthrout trout with stocked rainbow trout downstream (Masse Environmental Consultants Ltd. 2015), both structures had been replaced with bridges at the time of the surveys. Designs and remediations of these crossings were not recorded in PSCIS. Reassessments of these crossings were conducted by our team in 2020 and results will be loaded to PSCIS. In the field, Lotic Environmental Ltd. field teams were observed conducting two-pass closed site electrofishing in Grave Creek as part of a westslope cutthrout trout population assessment and aquatic monitoring program. Data from the program is uploaded to the Fisheries Information Summary System annually and is made available through the BC Data Catalog (MoE 2020b, 2020d).


PSCIS stream crossings 62425 and 62426 were ranked as moderate priorities for follow up with habitat confirmation due to the relatively large size of the stream network upstream (3.5km) and because they contained habitat rated as moderate value by VAST Resource Solutions Inc. (2013). The habitat confirmation was completed on September 20, 2020. A map of the watershed including areas surveyed is provided in Attachment 1 – Map 082G.124.


Stream Characteristics at Crossing

At the time of the survey, both culverts were un-embedded, non-backwatered and considered barriers to upstream fish passage. PSCIS crossing 62425 was 1.2m in diameter with a pipe length of 12m, a culvert slope of 7.5%, a stream width ratio of 3.1 and an outlet drop of 0.47m (Table 5.21). PSCIS crossing 62426 was 1.2m in diameter with a pipe length of 12m, a culvert slope of 5%, a stream width ratio of 2.9 and an outlet drop of 0.25m (Table 5.22). Water temperature was 8\(^\circ\)C, pH was 7.8 and conductivity was 370uS/cm.


Stream Characteristics Downstream of 62425

The stream was surveyed downstream from the culvert for 75m to where the stream joins the flow entering the valley from the south. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with deep pools dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, boulders, undercut banks, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.23, Figure 5.21). The average channel width was 3.7m, the average wetted width was 1.8m and the average gradient was 7.5%. The dominant substrate was cobbles with boulders subdominant. Downstream of the crossing there were frequent sections of gravels suitable for salmonid spawning and no barriers or obstacles to fish passage. Habitat was rated as high value for fry/juvenile salmonid rearing.


Stream Characteristics Upstream of 62425 and Downstream of 62426

The stream was surveyed upstream from 62425 for 170m to 62426. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with deep pools dominant. Cover was also present as large woody debris and boulders (Table 5.23, Figure 5.22). The average channel width was 3.5m, the average wetted width was 2.1m and the average gradient was 5%. There were abundant gravels suitable for resident westslope cutthrout trout spawning throughout (Figure 5.23). Some debris jam steps to 0.8m in height were observed and there were approximately 15 westslope cutthrout trout (approximately 170mm long) in the outlet pool for crossing 62426. Habitat value was rated as high for fry/juvenile salmonid rearing.


Stream Characteristics Upstream of 62426

The stream was surveyed upstream from 62426 for 650m. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with deep pools dominant. Cover was also present as boulders (Table 5.23, Figure 5.22). The average channel width was 3.5m, the average wetted width was 1.6m and the average gradient was 11.9%. This stream channel showed evidence of recent disturbance with eroding banks, multiple channels and aggraded sections throughout. Steps (0.6 - 0.9m in height) due to large woody debris debris jams were frequent throughout surveyed area and at a point approximately 200 m upstream of the road-stream crossing to the top end of the area surveyed, cover was limited to sporadic pools up to 0.3m deep. As mentioned previously, the historic channel was abandoned at 175m upstream of 62426 (UTM: 11 U 661748 5524558, Figure 5.23) with no flow observed within its banks. One of the tributaries that enters Grave Creek approximately 250m upstream of 62426 was accessed off of an adjacent spur road with a raped assessment conducted 250m upstream from the confluence with Grave Creek (UTM: 11U 662083 5524708). The average channel width at this location was 1.9m and the average gradient was 9%. Immediately upstream, the gradient in this tributary was 20% representing grades not likely passable for westslope cutthrout trout migrting upstream. Overall, habitat value upstream of 62426 within the mainstem of Grave Creek was rated as medium with moderate rearing potential for fry/juvenile westslope cutthrout trout.


Structure Remediation and Cost Estimate

Replacing PSCIS crossings 62425 and 62426 with bridges is recommended to provide access to the habitat located upstream. The costs are estimated at $125000 and $125000 respectively for a combined cost benefit of $15800/linear m and $27700/m2.

Conclusion

There is 0.2km of habitat upstream of crossing 62425 with habitat rated as high value for fry and juvenile salmonid rearing and another 1.8km upstream of 62426 rated as medium value. Although mapped only within the digital road atlas, it is suspected that the road on which both culverts are located is a forest tenure road (Canfor Forest Products Ltd. permit) as it is located immediately adjacent to another forest tenure road under permit to Canfor and within an area utilized for forestry. The crossings were ranked as moderate priorities for proceeding to design for replacement.


Table 5.21: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 62425.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-09-20 Crossing Sub Type Round Culvert
PSCIS ID 62425 Diameter (m) 1.2
External ID NA Length (m) 12
Crew KP, AI Embedded No
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) NA
Easting 661486 Resemble Channel No
Northing 5524426 Backwatered No
Stream Grave Creek Percent Backwatered NA
Road Spur Fill Depth (m) 1
Road Tenure Canfor R08362 Outlet Drop (m) 0.47
Channel Width (m) 3.7 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 0.38
Stream Slope (%) 7.5 Inlet Drop Yes
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 7.5
Habitat Value Medium Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:


Table 5.22: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 62426.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-09-20 Crossing Sub Type Round Culvert
PSCIS ID 62426 Diameter (m) 1.2
External ID NA Length (m) 12
Crew KP, AI Embedded No
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) NA
Easting 661611 Resemble Channel No
Northing 5524460 Backwatered No
Stream Grave Creek Percent Backwatered NA
Road Spur Fill Depth (m) 1
Road Tenure Canfor R08362 Outlet Drop (m) 0.25
Channel Width (m) 3.5 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 0.65
Stream Slope (%) 6 Inlet Drop Yes
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 5
Habitat Value Medium Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:


Table 5.23: Summary of habitat details for PSCIS crossings 62425 and 62426.
Site Location Length Surveyed (m) Channel Width (m) Wetted Width (m) Pool Depth (m) Gradient (%) Total Cover Habitat Value
62425 Upstream 170 3.5 2.1 0.3 5.0 moderate high
62425 Downstream 75 3.7 1.8 0.3 7.5 moderate high
62426 Upstream 650 3.9 1.6 0.4 11.9 moderate medium


Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 62425.

Figure 5.21: Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 62425.


Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 62425 and downstream of PSCIS crossing 62426.

Figure 5.22: Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 62425 and downstream of PSCIS crossing 62426.


Grave Creek redirection out of historic channel located upstream of PSCIS crossing 62426.

Figure 5.23: Grave Creek redirection out of historic channel located upstream of PSCIS crossing 62426.

Appendix - Crossing 62516

Island Lake Lodge Road - Tributary to Lizard Creek

Site Location

Crossing 62516 is located on a tributary to Lizard Creek, approximately 630m upstream from the confluence with Lizard Creek. This culvert has also been recorded in PSCIS as crossing 50153. The culvert is located at 2.5km on Island Lake Lodge Road which is an extension of Mt.Fernie Park Road accessed from Highway 3 within Fernie city limits. The Mt.Fernie Provincial Park is a popular recreational destination for hikers, sightseers and mountain bikers. Island Lake Lodge is located at 1400m of elevation near Island Lake and is a year round tourist destination providing accommodations, guided hiking and backcountry catskiing. The stream has been diverted from its historic channel and runs adjacent to a historic road to Lizard Creek approximately 500 downstream of the location of the confluence in the freshwater atlas.


Background

At the crossing location, the stream had good flow and is located within an area of old growth cedar adjacent to a recreation trail. At the time of the survey the stream was the highest volume tributary to Lizard Creek located on the east side of the valley. No fisheries information was available for the stream (MoE 2020d). Downstream however, Lizard Creek supports westslope cutthroat trout, bull trout, mountain whitefish, brook trout, longnose sucker and longnose dace (MoE 2020b). Elk River Alliance (2020b) conducted redd surveys in Lizard Creek in 2019 with a total of 55 redds observed within a 2.4km of stream surveyed comprising the largest densities of redds of the four tributaries surveyed (22.9 redds/km).


PSCIS stream crossing 62516 was ranked as a high priority for follow up with habitat confirmation due to the relatively large size of the stream recorded in PSCIS (channel width = 3.5m) relative to other tributary streams in the Lizard Creek watershed and because it was rated as containing high value habitat by VAST Resource Solutions Inc. (2013) and Grainger (2011). There is a bridge (PSCIS 197566) located on the Lazy Lizard recreation trail approximatley 350m upstream of the crossing and an unassessed modelled crossing (modelled ID 4600929) approximately 950m upstream. Downstream approximately 400m there is a foot bridge (PSCIS 197544) on a recreational hiking/biking trail. The habitat confirmation was completed on September 23, 2020. A map of the watershed including areas surveyed is provided in Attachment 1 – Map 082G.113.


Stream Characteristics at Crossing

Th culvert located at PSCIS 62516 appeared to have been replaced in 2020 with fresh rock and road fill present. At the time of the survey, the un-embedded and non-backwatered 1.2m diameter crossing was considered a barrier to upstream fish passage with a pipe length of 11m, a culvert slope of 5%, a stream width ratio of 2.1 and an outlet drop of 0.49m (Table 5.24). Water temperature was 9\(^\circ\)C, pH was 7.9 and conductivity was 333uS/cm.


Stream Characteristics Downstream

The stream was surveyed downstream from the culvert for 630m to Lizard Creek. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with deep pools dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, undercut banks, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.25, Figure 5.24). The average channel width was 2.5m, the average wetted width was 1.4m and the average gradient was 2.7%. The dominant substrate was gravels with cobbles subdominant. Adjacent to the historic road, on the right bank of stream, there was very limited shrub and tree riparian vegetation. Downstream of the crossing there were frequent sections of gravels suitable for salmonid spawning and no barriers or obstacles to fish passage. Habitat was rated as high value for fry/juvenile salmonid rearing.


Stream Characteristics Upstream

The stream was surveyed upstream from the culvert for 730m. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with undercut banks dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, deep pools, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.25, Figure 5.24). The average channel width was 2m, the average wetted width was 1.3m and the average gradient was 7.6%. There were abundant gravels suitable for resident westslope cutthrout trout spawning throughout (Figure 5.24). Fry were observed within the area surveyed to 540m upstream of the culvert where gradients increased to >20% for a distance of approximately 15m. Although no sampling was conducted, no fish were observed above this high gradient section. Habitat value was rated as high for fry/juvenile salmonid rearing.


Structure Remediation and Cost Estimate

Structure replacement with an open bottomed structure is recommended to provide access to the habitat located upstream of PSCIS crossing 62516. The cost of the work is estimated at $125000 for a cost benefit of $4300/linear m and $5300/m2.


Conclusion

There is 0.5km of mainstem habitat upstream of crossing 62516 with habitat rated as high value for fry and juvenile salmonid rearing. The road may be part of the Island Lake Recreational tenure or solely the responsiblity of the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations & Rural Development. The crossing was ranked as a moderate priority for proceeding to design for replacement.


Table 5.24: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 62516.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-09-23 Crossing Sub Type Round Culvert
PSCIS ID 62516 Diameter (m) 1.2
External ID NA Length (m) 11
Crew KP, AI Embedded No
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) NA
Easting 636123 Resemble Channel No
Northing 5484087 Backwatered No
Stream Tributary to Lizard Creek Percent Backwatered NA
Road Island Lake Lodge Road Fill Depth (m) 1.3
Road Tenure MoTi recreation Outlet Drop (m) 0.49
Channel Width (m) 2.47 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 0.8
Stream Slope (%) 2.67 Inlet Drop No
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 5
Habitat Value Medium Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:


Table 5.25: Summary of habitat details for PSCIS crossing 62516.
Location Length Surveyed (m) Channel Width (m) Wetted Width (m) Pool Depth (m) Gradient (%) Total Cover Habitat Value
Upstream 730 2.0 1.3 0.3 7.6 moderate high
Downstream 630 2.5 1.4 0.4 2.7 moderate high


Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 62516.

Figure 5.24: Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 62516.


Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 62516.

Figure 5.25: Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 62516.


Gravels suitable for spawning upstream of PSCIS crossing 62516.

Figure 5.26: Gravels suitable for spawning upstream of PSCIS crossing 62516.

Appendix - Crossings 197533 and 197559

Busato Rd and Highway 43 - Brule Creek

Site Location

PSCIS crossings 197533 and 197559 are located north of Sparwood, BC on Brule Creek, approximately 600m and 725m upstream from the Elk River. During 2020 surveys, two fords (PSCIS 197535 and 197536) were documented 700m and 2km upstream of crossing 197559 respectively. Although several un-assessed crossings are modelled upstream of PSCIS 197536 (ford), review of aerial imagery indicates that the sole crossing upstream on the mainstem of Brule Creek is a bridge (modelled crossing 24706664) and the remaining upstream crossings are on small and/or very steep tributaries and unlikely to be blocking access to significant amounts of important habitat. Both Busato Road and Highway 43 are the responsibility of the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure.


Background

At the crossing locations, Brule Creek is a 5th order stream with a watershed area upstream of the highway of approximately 87km2. The elevation of the watershed ranges from a maximum of 2800 to 1200m at PSCIS crossing 197533. Brule Creek is known to contain westslope cutthrout trout, rainbow trout and bull trout downstream of the subject culverts and westslope cutthrout trout and rainbow trout above (MoE 2020b). On the south side of the upper watershed, at an elevation of 2000m, is the 5ha Josephine Lake (also known as Big Lake). The lake was stocked with westslope cutthrout trout from 1983 - 2000 (MoE 2020b; “Fish Inventories Data Queries” 2020).


PSCIS stream crossings 197533 and 197559 were ranked as high priorities for follow up with fish passage assessments and habitat confirmations due to the large size of the stream network upstream (37km) of the highway and because Brule Creek is a 5th order stream. The habitat confirmation was completed on September 17, 2020. A map of the watershed including areas surveyed is provided in Attachment 1 – Map 082G.123.


Stream Characteristics at Crossing

At the time of the survey, both culverts were un-embedded, non-backwatered and considered barriers to upstream fish passage. PSCIS crossing 197533 was 3.3m in diameter with a pipe length of 20m, a culvert slope of 4%, a stream width ratio of 2.2 and an outlet drop of 0.7m (Table 5.26). PSCIS crossing 197559 was 2.5m in diameter with a pipe length of 35m, a culvert slope of 2.5%, a stream width ratio of 2.4 and an outlet drop of 0m (Table 5.27). Water temperature was 6\(^\circ\)C, pH was 7.5 and conductivity was 337uS/cm.


Stream Characteristics Downstream of 197533

The stream was surveyed downstream from the culvert for 400m. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with small woody debris dominant. Cover was also present as large woody debris and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.28, Figure 5.27). The average channel width was 7.4m, the average wetted width was 4.1m and the average gradient was 1.9%. The dominant substrate was cobbles with boulders subdominant. In the area surveyed, the stream channel appeared to be anthropogenically channelized and straightened with influence of adjacent livestock grazing/access negatively impacting stream banks due to loss of riparian vegetation and erosion. Habitat was rated as medium as it was considered an important migration corridor with moderate value habitat for fry/juvenile salmonid rearing.


Stream Characteristics Upstream of 197533 and Downstream of 197559

The stream was surveyed upstream from 197533 for 125m to 197559. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with dominant. Cover was also present as (Table 5.28, Figure 5.28). The average channel width was 5.5m, the average wetted width was 3.8m and the average gradient was 1.5%. There was a large pool at the outlet of crossing 197559 containing approximately nine westslope cutthrout trout with lengths of five of the fish estimated at 200mm and four at 300mm (Figure 5.29). The outlet pool was depth was >1m with gravels suitable for spawning at the tailout. Habitat value was rated as high for resident and fluvial salmonid rearing and spawning.


Stream Characteristics Upstream of 197559

The stream was surveyed immediately upstream from 197559 for 1200m and then another 600m beginning at the ford (PSCIS 197536) 2km upstream for a total of 1600m. The channel was dewatered immediately upstream of Highway 43 with intermittent pools only to a distance approximately 670 m upstream. Upstream of the dewatered area, stream flows increased with increasing upstream distance. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with deep pools dominant. Cover was also present as boulders and undercut banks (Table 5.28, Figure 5.28). The average channel width was 5.5m, the average wetted width was 2.3m and the average gradient was 3.5%. Overall, habitat upstream of 197559 was rated as high value habitat present suitable for resident and fluvial salmonid rearing and spawning.


Fish Sampling

To assess potential impacts of the culvert on fisheries values in the stream, electrofishing was conducted upstream of the crossing. Sampling was not conducted downstream of crossing 197559 as bull trout presence was suspected and it was determined that spawners and/or eggs may have been present. One site was sampled upstream with no fish captured (Figure 5.15). Raw results are included in digital format as Attachment 2 and summarized in Table 5.29.


Structure Remediation and Cost Estimate

As properties on Busato Road could be accessed from either side of the road, removal of PSCIS 197533 could be explored as an option for providing access to the 125m of habitat located upstream and below PSCIS 197533. However, to facilitate an estimate of “worst case scenario”, costs for replacement of both crossing 197533 and 197533 with bridges are estimated at $710000 and $3050000 respectively. The combined cost benefit of replacements are estimated at $7700/linear m and $23600/m2.


Conclusion

There is 0.1km of habitat upstream of crossing 197559 and another 23km upstream of 197559 rated as high value for resident and fluvial salmonid rearing/spawning. The lack of fish captured upstream of the crossing is not an indication of a lack of fish presence but may be indicative of low population densities and/or restricted access due to downstream culverts and dewatering. Although an interim ranking for remediation at the crossings was assessed as high priority to proceeding to designs for both crossings, follow up to determine the extent of dewatering during higher flow periods is recommended. Although unconfirmed at the time of reporting, the 670m section of stream located immediately upstream of Highway 43 that was flowing subsurface at the time of the survey, very likely flows above ground during high and peak flows when adult westslope cutthrout trout display a general pattern of upstream movement to spawning areas (Schweigert et al. 2017).


Table 5.26: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 197533.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-09-17 Crossing Sub Type Oval Culvert
PSCIS ID 197533 Diameter (m) 3.3
External ID NA Length (m) 20
Crew AI, KP Embedded No
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) NA
Easting 651626 Resemble Channel No
Northing 5528888 Backwatered No
Stream Brule Creek Percent Backwatered NA
Road Busato Rd Fill Depth (m) 1
Road Tenure MoTi local Outlet Drop (m) 0.7
Channel Width (m) 7.1 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 1.5
Stream Slope (%) 2 Inlet Drop Yes
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 4
Habitat Value High Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:


Table 5.27: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 197559.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-09-17 Crossing Sub Type Round Culvert
PSCIS ID 197559 Diameter (m) 2.5
External ID NA Length (m) 35
Crew KP, AI Embedded Yes
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) 0.05
Easting 651516 Resemble Channel Yes
Northing 5528829 Backwatered No
Stream Brule Creek Percent Backwatered NA
Road Highway 43 Fill Depth (m) 3
Road Tenure MoTi highway Outlet Drop (m) 0
Channel Width (m) 6.1 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 1.7
Stream Slope (%) 1.5 Inlet Drop No
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 2.5
Habitat Value Medium Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:


Table 5.28: Summary of habitat details for PSCIS crossings 197533 and 197559.
Site Location Length Surveyed (m) Channel Width (m) Wetted Width (m) Pool Depth (m) Gradient (%) Total Cover Habitat Value
197533 Upstream 125 5.5 3.8
1.5 moderate high
197533 Downstream 400 7.4 4.1
1.9 moderate medium
197559 Upstream 1600 7.7 2.3 0.6 3.5 moderate high


Table 5.29: Electrofishing site upstream of PSCIS crossing 197559.
Site Location Width (m) Length (m) Area (m2) Effort (s) Effort (s/m2)
6 Upstream 5.1 200 1020 233 0.2


Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 197533.

Figure 5.27: Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 197533.


Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 197533 and downstream of PSCIS crossing 197533.

Figure 5.28: Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 197533 and downstream of PSCIS crossing 197533.


Westlope cutthrout trout in outlet pool downstream of PSCIS crossing 197559.

Figure 5.29: Westlope cutthrout trout in outlet pool downstream of PSCIS crossing 197559.


Subsurface flow area upstream of PSCIS crossing 197559.

Figure 5.30: Subsurface flow area upstream of PSCIS crossing 197559.


Typical habitat above dewatered area upstream of PSCIS crossing 197533.

Figure 5.31: Typical habitat above dewatered area upstream of PSCIS crossing 197533.


Habitat within electrofishing site upstream of PSCIS crossing 197533.

Figure 5.32: Habitat within electrofishing site upstream of PSCIS crossing 197533.

Appendix - Crossing 197534

Highway 43 - Weigart Creek

Site Location

Crossing 197534 is located on a Weigart Creek, approximately 675m upstream from the confluence with the Elk River. The crossing is located on Highway 43 approximately 20km north of Sparwood. Elk Valley Park recreation site is located downstream of the crossing adjacent to the right bank of the river and the watershed upstream of the crossing is a habitat protection area with motor vehicle restrictions.


Background

At the crossing location, the stream is fourth order with a watershed area upstream of the road of approximately 43.3 km2 situated between Phillips Peak and Mount VanBuskirk. The elevation of the watershed ranges from a maximum of 2950 to 1250m at the culvert. Although, there are several modelled crossings on the mainstem of Hartley Creek upstream of the crossing, 2020 surveys indicated they were either fords or bridges. Modelled crossing 4606006 is a ford located approximately 1.2km upstream of the highway. There are several additional crossings modelled further upstream on the mainstem, however it is suspected that these crossings have been removed to facilitate the motor vehicle restrictions in place in the watershed. Westslope cutthroat trout have been recorded in Weigart Creek downstream of PCSIS 197534. Although there area multiple upstream survey sites recorded within provincial databases there have been no fish recorded upstream (MoE 2020d, 2020b).


PSCIS stream crossing 197534 was ranked as a high priority for follow up with habitat confirmation due to the large amount of potential habitat modelled upstream (20km). The habitat confirmation was completed on September 17, 2020. A map of the watershed including areas surveyed is provided in Attachment 1 – Map 082G.123.


Stream Characteristics at Crossing

At the time of the survey, the un-embedded and non-backwatered 3.2m diameter crossing was considered a barrier to upstream fish passage with a pipe length of 18m, a culvert slope of 3.4%, a stream width ratio of 1.3 and an outlet drop of 0.15m (Table 5.30). Water temperature was 3\(^\circ\)C, pH was 8.5 and conductivity was 422uS/cm.


Stream Characteristics Downstream

The stream was surveyed downstream from the culvert for 675m. Overall total cover amount was rated as moderate with undercut banks dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, boulders, deep pools, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.31, Figure 5.33). The average channel width was 4.7m, the average wetted width was 3.6m and the average gradient was 3.7%. The dominant substrate was cobbles with gravels subdominant. Pools were present to 0.8m deep and gravels/cobbles suitable for resident and fluvial spawning were present. A ford crosses the stream at the Fortis gasline located approximately 115m downstream of the highway. Overall, habitat was rated as medium value providing an important migration corridor and habitat suitable for resident and fluvial salmonid rearing and spawning.



Stream Characteristics Upstream

The stream was surveyed immediately upstream from the culvert for 675m. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with undercut banks dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, boulders, deep pools, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.31, Figure 5.34). The average channel width was 6.6m, the average wetted width was 4.6m and the average gradient was 4.5%. The dominant substrate was cobbles with boulders subdominant. Habitat became increasingly complex with increased distance upstream. Throughout the area surveyed there were occasional pools available with depths suitable for juvenile/adult salmonid overwintering and rearing and frequent sections of gravels available for resident and fluvial salmonid spawning. Overall, habitat was rated as medium value.


Structure Remediation and Cost Estimate

Structure replacement with an open bottomed structure is recommended to provide access to the habitat located upstream of PSCIS crossing 197534. The cost of the work is estimated at $2500000 for a cost benefit of $4600/linear m and $10000/m2.


Conclusion

There is an estimated 11.6km of mainstem Weigert Creek habitat available upstream of PSCIS 197534 with habitat rated as high value, representing an important migration corridor with high rearing and spawning potential for resident and fluvial salmonids. Highway 43 is the responsibility of the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure. The crossing was ranked as a high priority for proceeding to design for replacement with an open bottomed structure.

Table 5.30: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 197534.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-09-17 Crossing Sub Type Round Culvert
PSCIS ID 197534 Diameter (m) 3.2
External ID NA Length (m) 18
Crew AI, KP Embedded No
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) NA
Easting 650144 Resemble Channel No
Northing 5532055 Backwatered No
Stream Weigart Creek Percent Backwatered NA
Road Highway 43 Fill Depth (m) 1.3
Road Tenure MoTi highway Outlet Drop (m) 0.15
Channel Width (m) 4.3 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 0.6
Stream Slope (%) 2 Inlet Drop Yes
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 3.4
Habitat Value High Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:
Table 5.31: Summary of habitat details for PSCIS crossing 197534.
Location Length Surveyed (m) Channel Width (m) Wetted Width (m) Pool Depth (m) Gradient (%) Total Cover Habitat Value
Upstream 1100 6.6 4.6 0.5 4.5 moderate high
Downstream 675 4.7 3.6 0.5 3.7 moderate medium


Habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 197534.

Figure 5.33: Habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 197534.


Habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 197534.

Figure 5.34: Habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 197534.

Appendix - Crossing 197542

Dicken Road - Hartley Creek

Site Location

Crossing 197542 is located on a Hartley Creek, approximately 400m upstream from the confluence with the Elk River. The crossing is located on Dicken Road just north of Fernie. Dicken Road is a paved Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure collector road accessing semi-rural residential and recreational areas.


Background

At the crossing location, the stream is fourth order with a watershed area upstream of the road of approximately 17.1 km2. The elevation of the watershed ranges from a maximum of 2350 to 1030m at the culvert. The system is headed by the 1.6ha Hartley Lake. Although, there are several modelled crossings on the mainstem of Hartley Creek upstream of the crossing, 2020 surveys indicated they were either not present (4603296, 24732660) or bridges (4606518). PSCIS crossing 197582 is an open bottomed structure located under Highway 3 approximately 400m downstream of Dicken Road and was considered passable.


During surveys, we spoke with the owner of lands adjacent to crossing 197542 and they noted that the properties both upstream and downstream of the crossing were located within an area used historically as a log sort and that Hartley Creek was used to transport logs at that time. The landowner also reported that within the last ten years there was a dam failure upstream near Hartley Lake that resulted in significant debris flows throughout the lower reaches of the stream. Aggradation of the channel adjacent to this crossing, reported by Robinson (2008) as likely a result of a low width/depth ratio and unstable banks, has been an ongoing issue requiring repeated dredging to reduce disruptions to traffic flow and high water damage to highway infrastructure. Interior Reforestation Co. Ltd. designed and installed remediation measures in 2006 and 2007 (vortex weir installation, channel armouring, rootwad installation and riparian planting) with the intent to restore the hydraulic conditions necessary to carry transported gravel further downstream and improve fish habitat immediately below the crossing (Robinson 2008). The works were not completely successful in preventing aggradation, as dredging was reported in 2019 (Marlim Ecological Consulting 2019) with only approximately 30cm of headboard observed within the highway stream crossing structure during 2020 surveys.


Westslope cutthroat trout, bull trout and brook trout have been recorded in Hartley Creek upstream of PCSIS 197542 with westslope cutthroat trout, bull trout and mountain whitefish recorded below (MoE 2020b). A radio-tagging study conducted in 2001–2002, identified Hartley Creek as a spawning location of westslope cutthrout trout captured and tagged in the Elk River (Schweigert et al. 2017). In 2012, three pass closed site electrofishing data, including individual fish collection information, sampling effort and site measurements was collected for three sites located within the first 100m upstream of Dicken Road as part of work completed by Lotic Environmental Ltd. (2012) to produce habitat suitability for westslope cutthrout trout in the Upper Elk River. Westslope cutthrout trout were captured at all sites.


PSCIS stream crossing 197542 was ranked as a high priority for follow up with habitat confirmation due to the large amount of potential habitat modelled upstream (13km) including the 1.6ha Hartley Lake. The habitat confirmation was completed on September 18, 2020. A map of the watershed including areas surveyed is provided in Attachment 1 – Map 082G.113.


Stream Characteristics at Crossing

At the time of the survey, the un-embedded and non-backwatered 2.6m diameter oval crossing structure was considered a barrier to upstream fish passage with a pipe length of 20m, a culvert slope of 2%, a stream width ratio of 1.3 and an outlet drop of 0.4m (Table 5.32). Water temperature was 5\(^\circ\)C, pH was 8.6 and conductivity was 526uS/cm.


Stream Characteristics Downstream

The stream was surveyed downstream from the culvert for 940m to the confluence with the Elk River including the 500m below PSCIS crossing 197582. Within the 400m section between Dicken Road and Highway 3, total cover amount was rated as moderate with deep pools dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris and undercut banks (Table 5.33, Figure 5.35). The average channel width was 3.6m, the average wetted width was 2.8m and the average gradient was 1.7%. The dominant substrate was gravels with cobbles subdominant. Although abundant gravels suitable for spawning were present, the Hartley Creek channel appeared anthropogenically straightened in the area surveyed with a notable lack of deep pools and undercut banks. Overall, habitat was rated as medium value providing suitable habitat for resident and fluvial westlope cutthrout trout spawning.


Within the 500m below PSCIS crossing 197582, the first 175m of channel downstream of the culvert was primarily composed of an aggrading gravel channel with widths between 12-15m. Downstream of this initial section was a marsh area impounded by multiple beaver dams containing run sections to 1m deep and fine substrates. Much of the channel surveyed within the lower sections was within the Elk River floodplain. Total cover amount was rated as moderate with overhanging vegetation dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, and instream vegetation (Table 5.33, Figures 5.38 - ??). The average channel width was 8.1m, the average wetted width was 6.3m and the average gradient was 1.8%. The dominant substrate was gravels with fines subdominant. Young of the year salmonids were observed upstream of upper most beaver dam. Habitat was rated as medium representing an important migration corridor containing habitat with moderate rearing potential for resident and fluvial salmonids.


Stream Characteristics Upstream

The stream was surveyed immediately upstream from the culvert for 650m with an addition 75m section surveyed upstram approximatley 2.5km upstream. A small dam (0.3m) high is located approximately 5m upstream of Dicken Road and may present an obstruction to upstream fish passage for fry and juvenile salmonids at some flows. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, undercut banks, deep pools, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.33, Figure 5.38). The average channel width was 6.1m, the average wetted width was 3.8m and the average gradient was 3.5%. The dominant substrate was cobbles with gravels subdominant. There were frequent pools formed by small and large woody debris ranging from 0.3 - 0.7m in depth with a debris jam near top of site (11U 643668 5491243) measured at 1.2m in height. Pockets of gravels suitable for resident and fluvial salmonids were present and there were areas of erosion notable on the right bank of the stream.


Within the 75m section of stream surveyed 2.5km upstream of Dicken Road, stream conditions were similiar to those observed downstream with an average channel width of 4.6m and gravel dominated substrate (Figure 5.39). Overall, upstream of PSCIS 197542 was rated as high habitat value, containing habitat with moderate rearing and spawning potential for resident and fluvial salmonids.


Structure Remediation and Cost Estimate

Structure replacement with an open bottomed structure is recommended to provide access to the habitat located upstream of PSCIS crossing 197542. The cost of the work is estimated at $1e+06 for a cost benefit of $7200/linear m and $12600/m2.


Conclusion

There is an estimated 7.2km of mainstem habitat available upstream of crossing 197542 with habitat rated as high value, representing an important migration corridor with moderate rearing and spawning potential for resident and fluvial salmonids. Dicken Road is the responsiblity of the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure. We recommend fish collection data from Lotic Environmental Ltd. (2012) be analyzed to calculate baseline fish densities upstream of the crossing in 2012. The crossing was ranked as a high priority for proceeding to design for replacement with an open bottomed structure. The private land adjacent to Hartley Creek in the vicinity of Dicken Road and Highway 3 may represent valuable opportunities for channel and riparian restoration activities as it is located within an area of intensive fish habitat impacts resulting from dredging to protect highway infrastructure as well as other historic land use activities (i.e. log transport and processing).

Table 5.32: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 197542.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-09-18 Crossing Sub Type Oval Culvert
PSCIS ID 197542 Diameter (m) 2.6
External ID NA Length (m) 20
Crew AI, KP Embedded No
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) NA
Easting 643534 Resemble Channel No
Northing 5490723 Backwatered No
Stream Hartley Creek Percent Backwatered NA
Road Dicken Road Fill Depth (m) 0.4
Road Tenure MoTi collector Outlet Drop (m) 0.4
Channel Width (m) 3.5 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 0.8
Stream Slope (%) 1 Inlet Drop No
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 2
Habitat Value High Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:
Table 5.33: Summary of habitat details for PSCIS crossing 197542.
Site Location Length Surveyed (m) Channel Width (m) Wetted Width (m) Pool Depth (m) Gradient (%) Total Cover Habitat Value
197542 Upstream 725 6.1 3.8 0.5 3.5 moderate high
197542 Downstream 400 3.6 2.8 0.2 1.7 moderate medium
197582 Downstream 540 8.1 6.3 0.5 1.8 moderate medium


Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 197542.

Figure 5.35: Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 197542.


Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 197582.

Figure 5.36: Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 197582.


PSCIS crossing 197582.

Figure 5.37: PSCIS crossing 197582.


Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 197542.

Figure 5.38: Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 197542.


Habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 197542 approximatley 2.5km.

Figure 5.39: Habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 197542 approximatley 2.5km.

Appendix - Crossing 197555

Elk River FSR - Tributary to Elk River

Site Location

Crossing 197555 is located on a tributary to Elk River, approximately 900m upstream from the confluence with the Elk River. The crossing is located on the Elk River FSR approximately 10km north of Elkford, BC. The Elk River FSR is a gravel forest tenure road (forest file id 0103) with active log hauling at the time of the survey.


Background

At the crossing location, the stream is 4th order with a watershed area upstream of the road of approximately 17km2. The elevation of the watershed ranges from a maximum of 2900 to 1400m at the culvert. Upstream of the crossing, there are no anthropogenic barriers on the mainstem. Although there are two modelled crossings on small tributaries that enter the stream approximately 1.5km upstream of the road, machinery operators encountered onsite indicated that they had been removed during road deactivation. No fisheries information was available for the stream (MoE 2020d) however westslope cutthroat trout, bull trout, mountain whitefish, brook trout, longnose sucker and longnose dace (among other species) have been recorded downstream in the Elk River (MoE 2020b).


PSCIS stream crossing 197555 was ranked as a high priority for follow up with habitat confirmation due to the large amount of habitat modelled upstream of the crossing. The habitat confirmation was completed on September 16, 2020. A map of the watershed including areas surveyed is provided in Attachment 1 – Map 082J.103.


Stream Characteristics at Crossing

At the time of the survey, the un-embedded and non-backwatered 1.5m diameter crossing was considered a barrier to upstream fish passage with a pipe length of 49m, a culvert slope of 3.5%, a stream width ratio of 2.3 and an outlet drop of 1.48m (Table 5.34). Water temperature was 6\(^\circ\)C, pH was 7.2 and conductivity was 378uS/cm.


Stream Characteristics Downstream

The stream was surveyed downstream from the culvert for 700m. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with deep pools dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, boulders, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.35, Figure 5.40). The average channel width was 4.4m, the average wetted width was 3.1m and the average gradient was 3.6%. The dominant substrate was cobbles with gravels subdominant . There were frequent pools formed by small and large woody debris ranging from 0.3 - 0.75m in depth (average residual depth = 0.4m). Frequent pockets of gravels suitably sized for resident and fluvial salmonid spawning were also present. Habitat value was rated as high with good potential for fry/juvenile salmonid rearing.


Stream Characteristics Upstream

The stream was surveyed upstream from the culvert for 675m. Overall, total cover amount was rated as abundant with boulders as the dominant type. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, undercut banks, deep pools, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.35, Figure 5.41). The average channel width was 5.9m, the average wetted width was 3.8m and the average gradient was 5.9%. The dominant substrate was cobbles with boulders subdominant. The stream had good flows, pools to 0.6m deep (average residual depth = 0.4m) were present and pockets of gravel suitable for spawning were observed throughout. Infrequent large woody debris jams to 0.5m high were also noted. Habitat value was rated as high for fry and juvenile westslope cutthrout trout and bull trout rearing.


Fish Sampling

To assess potential impacts of the culvert on fish communities in the stream, electrofishing was conducted upstream and downstream of the crossing. One 150m site was sampled upstream and one 315m site was sampled downstream. One bull trout was captured downstream and no fish were captured upstream (Figure 5.42). Raw results are included in digital format as Attachment 2 and summarized in Table 5.36.


Structure Remediation and Cost Estimate

Structure replacement with an open bottomed culvert is recommended to provide access to the habitat located upstream of PSCIS crossing 197555. Due to the large amount of fill on the road (8) the size of a replacement bridge was estimated at 25m. The cost for work is estimated at $312000 for a cost benefit of $19200/linear m and $33700/m2.

Conclusion

There is an estimated 6km of mainstem habitat upstream of crossing 197555 with habitat in the areas surveyed upstream of the crossing rated as high value for fry and juvenile salmonid rearing. However, fish sampling results indicate that westslope cutthrout trout are not currently utilizing the stream and densities of bull trout are very low. This could be the result of the cold water conditions due to the positioning of the watershed at high elevation in the generally cold Rocky Mountain setting. Elk River FSR is a forest tenure liscensee road of the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations & Rural Development. The crossing was ranked as a moderate priority for proceeding to design for replacement with an open bottomed structure.


Table 5.34: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 197555.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-09-16 Crossing Sub Type Round Culvert
PSCIS ID 197555 Diameter (m) 1.5
External ID NA Length (m) 49
Crew KP, AI Embedded No
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) NA
Easting 646735 Resemble Channel No
Northing 5554534 Backwatered No
Stream Tributary to Elk River Percent Backwatered NA
Road Elk River FSR Fill Depth (m) 8
Road Tenure FLNR 0103 Outlet Drop (m) 1.48
Channel Width (m) 3.5 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 1.3
Stream Slope (%) 1.5 Inlet Drop Yes
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 3.5
Habitat Value High Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:


Table 5.35: Summary of habitat details for PSCIS crossing 197555.
Location Length Surveyed (m) Channel Width (m) Wetted Width (m) Pool Depth (m) Gradient (%) Total Cover Habitat Value
Upstream 675 5.9 3.8 0.4 5.9 abundant high
Downstream 700 4.4 3.1 0.4 3.6 moderate high


Table 5.36: Electrofishing sites for PSCIS crossing 197555.
Site Location Width (m) Length (m) Area (m2) Effort (s) Effort (s/m2)
4 Downstream 3.1 315 976 550 0.6
3 Upstream 3.8 150 570 177 0.3


Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 197555.

Figure 5.40: Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 197555.


Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 197555.

Figure 5.41: Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 197555.


Bull trout captured downstream of PSCIS crossing 197555.

Figure 5.42: Bull trout captured downstream of PSCIS crossing 197555.

References

Allaire, JJ, Yihui Xie, Jonathan McPherson, Javier Luraschi, Kevin Ushey, Aron Atkins, Hadley Wickham, Joe Cheng, Winston Chang, and Richard Iannone. 2020. Rmarkdown: Dynamic Documents for R. https://github.com/rstudio/rmarkdown.

Bell, M. C. 1991. “Fisheries Handbook of Engineering Requirements and Biological Criteria.” https://www.fs.fed.us/biology/nsaec/fishxing/fplibrary/Bell_1991_Fisheries_handbook_of_engineering_requirements_and.pdf.

Blank, Matt D., Kevin M. Kappenman, Kathryn Plymesser, Katharine Banner, and Joel Cahoon. 2020. “Swimming Performance of Rainbow Trout and Westslope Cutthroat Trout in an Open-Channel Flume.” Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management 11 (1): 217–25. https://doi.org/10.3996/052019-JFWM-040.

Bourne, Christina, Dan Kehler, Yolanda Wiersma, and David Cote. 2011. “Barriers to Fish Passage and Barriers to Fish Passage Assessments: The Impact of Assessment Methods and Assumptions on Barrier Identification and Quantification of Watershed Connectivity.” Aquatic Ecology 45: 389–403. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10452-011-9362-z.

Bramblett, Robert, Mason Bryant, Brenda Wright, and Robert White. 2002. “Seasonal Use of Small Tributary and Main-Stem Habitats by Juvenile Steelhead, Coho Salmon, and Dolly Varden in a Southeastern Alaska Drainage Basin.” Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 131: 498–506. https://doi.org/10.1577/1548-8659(2002)131<0498:SUOSTA>2.0.CO;2.

Clarkin, K, A Connor, M Furniss, B Gubernick, M Love, K Moynan, and S WilsonMusser. 2005. “National Inventory and Assessment Procedure for Identifying Barriers to Aquatic Organism Passage at Road-Stream Crossings.” United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, National Technology and Development Program. https://www.fs.fed.us/biology/nsaec/fishxing/publications/PDFs/NIAP.pdf.

Cote, David, P Frampton, M Langdon, and R Collier. 2005. Fish Passage and Stream Habitat Restoration in Terra Nova National Park Highway Culverts.

Davidson, A, H Tepper, J Bisset, K Anderson, P. J Tschaplinski, A Chirico, A Waterhouse, et al. 2018. “Aquatic Ecosystems Cumulative Effects Assessment Report.” https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/natural-resource-stewardship/cumulative-effects/final_ev_cemf_aquatic_ecosystems_cea_report_24072018.pdf.

Diebel, M. W., M. Fedora, S. Cogswell, and J. R. O’Hanley. 2015. “Effects of Road Crossings on Habitat Connectivity for Stream-Resident Fish: STREAM-RESIDENT FISH HABITAT CONNECTIVITY.” River Research and Applications 31 (10): 1251–61. https://doi.org/10.1002/rra.2822.

“Elk River Alliance.” 2020a. Elk River Alliance. 2020. https://www.elkriveralliance.ca/.

Elk River Alliance. 2020b. “Elk River Westslope Cutthroat Trout (WCT) Research Initiative: 2019 Report.” https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/elkriveralliance/pages/240/attachments/original/1603756805/FRI_Phase_1_2019_Report_%28Report___Apps%29_compressed.pdf?1603756805.

Elk Valley Cumulative Effects Management Framework Working Group. 2018. “Elk Valley Cumulative Effects Assessment and Management Report.” https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/natural-resource-stewardship/cumulative-effects/final_elk_valley_ceam_12122018.pdf.

“Fish Inventories Data Queries.” 2020. Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy - Knowledge Management. 2020. http://a100.gov.bc.ca/pub/fidq/welcome.do.

Fish Passage Technical Working Group. 2011. “A Checklist for Fish Habitat Confirmation Prior to the Rehabilitation Fo a Stream Crossing.” https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/natural-resource-stewardship/land-based-investment/forests-for-tomorrow/checklist-for-fish-habitat-confirmation-201112.pdf.

———. 2014. “Fish Passage Strategic Approach: Protocl for Prioritizing Sites for Fish Passage Remediation.” https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/plants-animals-and-ecosystems/fish-fish-habitat/fish-passage/strategic20approach20july202014.pdf.

FLNRORD. 2020a. “Digital Road Atlas (DRA) - Master Partially-Attributed Roads - Data Catalogue.” 2020. https://catalogue.data.gov.bc.ca/dataset/digital-road-atlas-dra-master-partially-attributed-roads.

———. 2020b. “Forest Tenure Road Section Lines - Data Catalogue.” 2020. https://catalogue.data.gov.bc.ca/dataset/forest-tenure-road-section-lines.

Grainger, Karen L. 2011. “2011 Fish Passage Culvert Assessments Within the Rocky Mountain Resource District.”

Kemp, P. S., and J. R. O’Hanley. 2010. “Procedures for Evaluating and Prioritising the Removal of Fish Passage Barriers: A Synthesis: EVALUATION OF FISH PASSAGE BARRIERS.” Fisheries Management and Ecology, no–no. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2400.2010.00751.x.

“Ktunaxa Nation.” 2020. 2020. https://www.ktunaxa.org/.

Lotic Environmental Ltd. 2012. “Fish Collection Permit CB12-81893 Elk River Tributaries Habitat Suitability.” 2012. http://a100.gov.bc.ca/pub/acat/public/viewReport.do?reportId=40397.

Mahlum, Shad, David Cote, Yolanda Wiersma, Dan Kehler, and K. Clarke. 2014. “Evaluating the Barrier Assessment Technique Derived from FishXing Software and the Upstream Movement of Brook Trout Through Road Culverts.” Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 143. https://doi.org/10.1080/00028487.2013.825641.

Masse Environmental Consultants Ltd. 2015. “Fish Habitat Confirmation Assessments – East Kootenay Area Project PD15TFE010.”

Mines, and Low Carbon Innovation Ministry of Energy. 2020. “The East Kootenay Coalfields - Province of British Columbia.” Province of British Columbia. 2020. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/industry/mineral-exploration-mining/british-columbia-geological-survey/geology/coalfields/eastkootenay.

Ministry of Forests, Lands. 2020. “Elk Valley Cumulative Effects Management Framework - Province of British Columbia.” Province of British Columbia. 2020. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/environment/natural-resource-stewardship/cumulative-effects-framework/regional-assessments/kootenay-boundary/elk-valley-cemf.

MoE. 2011. “Field Assessment for Determining Fish Passage Status of Closed Bottom Structures.” BC Ministry of Environment (MoE). https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/natural-resource-stewardship/land-based-investment/forests-for-tomorrow/field-assessment-for-determining-fish-passage-status-of-cbs.pdf.

———. 2020a. “Fish Inventories Data Queries.” Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy - Knowledge Management. 2020. http://a100.gov.bc.ca/pub/fidq/searchSingleWaterbody.do.

———. 2020b. “Known BC Fish Observations and BC Fish Distributions.” Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy - Knowledge Management. 2020. https://catalogue.data.gov.bc.ca/dataset/known-bc-fish-observations-and-bc-fish-distributions.

———. 2020c. “Provincial Obstacles to Fish Passage - Data Catalogue.” Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy - Knowledge Management. 2020. https://catalogue.data.gov.bc.ca/dataset/provincial-obstacles-to-fish-passage.

———. 2020d. “Stream Inventory Sample Sites.” Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy - Knowledge Management. 2020. https://catalogue.data.gov.bc.ca/dataset/stream-inventory-sample-sites.

Norris, Simon. 2020. Bcfishpass. Hillcrest Geographics. https://github.com/smnorris/bcfishpass.

Norris, Simon, and Craig Mount. 2016. “Fish Passage GIS Analysis Version 2.2 – Methodology and Output Data Specifications.” https://data.skeenasalmon.info/dataset/bc-fish-passage-program.

QGIS Development Team. 2009. QGIS Geographic Information System. Open Source Geospatial Foundation. http://qgis.osgeo.org.

Roni, Phil, Karrie Hanson, and Timothy Beechie. 2008. “Global Review of the Physical and Biological Effectiveness of Stream Habitat Rehabilitation Techniques.” North American Journal of Fisheries Management 28: 856–90. https://doi.org/10.1577/M06-169.1.

Saldi-Caromile, K, K Bates, P Skidmore, J Barenti, and D Pineo. 2004. “Stream Habitat Restoration Guidelines: Final Draft.” https://wdfw.wa.gov/sites/default/files/publications/00043/wdfw00043.pdf.

Schmetterling, David. 2001. “Seasonal Movements of Fluvial Westslope Cutthroat Trout in the Blackfoot River Drainage, Montana.” North American Journal of Fisheries Management 21: 507–20. https://doi.org/10.1577/1548-8675(2001)021<0507:SMOFWC>2.0.CO;2.

Schweigert, J. F, John Robert Post, Canada, Environment, limate Change Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service, and Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 2017. COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Westslope Cutthroat Trout, Oncorhynchus Clarkii Lewisi, Saskatchewan-Nelson River Populations, Pacific Populations, in Canada. Ottawa: Environment and Climate Change Canada. http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/eccc/CW69-14-506-2017-eng.pdf.

Shaw, Edward A., Eckart Lange, James D. Shucksmith, and David N. Lerner. 2016. “Importance of Partial Barriers and Temporal Variation in Flow When Modelling Connectivity in Fragmented River Systems.” Ecological Engineering 91: 515–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2016.01.030.

Slaney, P. A, Daiva O Zaldokas, and Watershed Restoration Program (B.C.). 1997. Fish Habitat Rehabilitation Procedures. Vancouver, B.C.: Watershed Restoration Program. https://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/library/FFIP/Slaney_PA1997_A.pdf.

Swales, Stephen, and C. Levings. 1989. “Role of Off-Channel Ponds in the Life Cycle of Coho Salmon ( Oncorhynchus Kisutch ) and Other Juvenile Salmonids in the Coldwater River, British Columbia.” Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences - CAN J FISHERIES AQUAT SCI 46: 232–42. https://doi.org/10.1139/f89-032.

Thompson, Richard. 2013. “Assessing Fish Passage at Culverts – the Method, Its Metrics and Preliminary Findings from over 4,000 Assessments.” https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/plants-animals-and-ecosystems/fish-fish-habitat/fish-passage/assessing_fish_passage_at_culverts.pdf.

VAST Resource Solutions Inc. 2013. “2012 Fish Passage Assessments in BCTS Kootenay Business Area (PD13TFE006).” http://a100.gov.bc.ca/appsdata/acat/documents/r43047/PD13TFE006_VAST_FinalReport_1405379598103_5374008940.pdf.

Walker, L, S MacDonald, C Barnes, C Cipriano, G Preston, M Clarke, D Marcotte, C Hopkins, and J Byrne. 2016. “Elk River Flood Strategy.” 2016. https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/elkriveralliance/pages/149/attachments/original/1465941478/Elk_River_Flood_Strategy_June10_Final_Report.pdf?1465941478.

Xie, Yihui. 2016. Bookdown: Authoring Books and Technical Documents with R Markdown. Boca Raton, Florida: Chapman; Hall/CRC. https://github.com/rstudio/bookdown.